Home
  By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon


We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

´╗┐Title: Warren Commission (11 of 26): Hearings Vol. XI (of 15)
Author: Kennedy, The President's Commission on the Assassination of President
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Warren Commission (11 of 26): Hearings Vol. XI (of 15)" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.



www.history-matters.com.



Transcriber's note: Stylized "U" is denoted as =U=. Italics are
represented by _underscores_.



    INVESTIGATION OF

    THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

    HEARINGS
    Before the President's Commission
    on the Assassination
    of President Kennedy

PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE ORDER 11130, an Executive order creating a
Commission to ascertain, evaluate, and report upon the facts relating
to the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy and the
subsequent violent death of the man charged with the assassination and
S.J. RES. 137, 88TH CONGRESS, a concurrent resolution conferring upon
the Commission the power to administer oaths and affirmations, examine
witnesses, receive evidence, and issue subpenas

_Volume_ XI


UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON, D.C.


U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1964

For sale in complete sets by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402



    PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
    ON THE
    ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY


    CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN, _Chairman_

    SENATOR RICHARD B. RUSSELL
    SENATOR JOHN SHERMAN COOPER
    REPRESENTATIVE HALE BOGGS
    REPRESENTATIVE GERALD R. FORD
    MR. ALLEN W. DULLES
    MR. JOHN J. McCLOY


    J. LEE RANKIN, _General Counsel_


    _Assistant Counsel_

    FRANCIS W. H. ADAMS
    JOSEPH A. BALL
    DAVID W. BELIN
    WILLIAM T. COLEMAN, Jr.
    MELVIN ARON EISENBERG
    BURT W. GRIFFIN
    LEON D. HUBERT, Jr.
    ALBERT E. JENNER, Jr.
    WESLEY J. LIEBELER
    NORMAN REDLICH
    W. DAVID SLAWSON
    ARLEN SPECTER
    SAMUEL A. STERN
    HOWARD P. WILLENS[A]

    [A] Mr. Willens also acted as liaison between the Commission
        and the Department of Justice.


    _Staff Members_

    PHILLIP BARSON
    EDWARD A. CONROY
    JOHN HART ELY
    ALFRED GOLDBERG
    MURRAY J. LAULICHT
    ARTHUR MARMOR
    RICHARD M. MOSK
    JOHN J. O'BRIEN
    STUART POLLAK
    ALFREDDA SCOBEY
    CHARLES N. SHAFFER, Jr.


Biographical information on the Commissioners and the staff can be found
in the Commission's _Report_.



Preface


The testimony of the following witnesses is contained in volume XI:
John Edward Pic, Lee Harvey Oswald's halfbrother; Edward John Pic,
Jr., John Edward Pic's father; Kerry Wendell Thornley, a Marine Corps
acquaintance of Oswald; George B. Church, Jr., Mrs. George B. Church,
Jr., and Billy Joe Lord, who were on the boat Oswald took when he left
the United States for Russia; Alexander Kleinlerer, Mrs. Donald Gibson,
Ruth Hyde Paine, Michael Ralph Paine, and Gary Taylor, who became
acquainted with Oswald and his wife after their return to Texas in
1962; M. Waldo George, the Oswald's landlord at Neely Street in Dallas;
William Kirk Stuckey, who gave testimony relating to Oswald's political
views; Horace Elroy Twiford and Estelle Twiford, who gave testimony
relating to the date and route of Oswald's trip to Mexico in 1963;
Virginia H. James, James D. Crowley, James L. Ritchie, and Carroll
Hamilton Seeley, Jr., of the U.S. State Department; Louis Feldsott,
who gave testimony relating to the purchase of the C2766 rifle; J.
Philip Lux and Albert C. Yeargan, Jr., employees of sporting-goods
stores in Dallas; Howard Leslie Brennan, who was present at the
assassination scene; Louis Weinstock, an official of the Communist
Party, Vincent T. Lee, an official of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee,
and Farrell Dobbs, an official of the Socialist Workers Party, who
testified concerning contacts Oswald had with their groups; Virginia
Gray, who gave testimony concerning a letter written by Oswald;
Albert F. Staples, who gave testimony concerning records relating to
Marina Oswald; Katherine Mallory, Monica Kramer, and Rita Naman, who
encountered Oswald while touring Russia in 1961; John Bryan McFarland,
Meryl McFarland, and Pamela Mumford, who were on the bus Oswald took to
Mexico in the fall of 1963; Dial Duwayne Ryder, Hunter Schmidt, Jr.,
Charles W. Greener, Gertrude Hunter, Edith Whitworth, James Lehrer, and
Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald, who gave testimony concerning an allegation
that Oswald had taken a rifle to a gun-repair shop in Dallas; Eugene D.
Anderson and James A. Zahm, of the U.S. Marine Corps, experts on the
subject of marksmanship; C. A. Hamblen, Robert Gene Fenley, and Aubrey
Lee Lewis, who gave testimony concerning an allegation that Oswald was
sending and receiving telegrams through a Dallas Western Union office;
Dean Adams Andrews, Jr., Evaristo Rodriguez, Orest Pena, Ruperto Pena,
and Sylvia Odio, who testified concerning contacts they believed they
had with Oswald in New Orleans and Dallas under various circumstances;
Edwin A. Walker, who testified concerning an attempt on his life on
April 10, 1963, and his attorney, Clyde J. Watts; Ivan D. Lee, an
agent of the FBI, who gave testimony regarding photographs which he
took of General Walker's residence; Bernard Weissman, who paid for an
advertisement concerning President Kennedy which appeared in a Dallas
newspaper on November 22, 1963; Warren Allen Reynolds, who was present
in the vicinity of the Tippit crime scene; Priscilla Mary Post Johnson,
who interviewed Oswald in Moscow; Eric Rogers, who lived in the same
building as Oswald and his wife in New Orleans in 1963; Bardwell D.
Odum, James R. Malley, and Richard Helms, who testified concerning
a photograph which was shown to Marguerite Oswald for purposes of
identification; Peter Megargee Brown, who testified concerning records
relating to Oswald when he lived in New York during his youth; Francis
J. Martello of the New Orleans Police Department, who interrogated
Oswald in August 1963; John Corporon, an official of a New Orleans
broadcasting station; Mrs. J. V. Allen, who testified concerning the
schooling of Oswald's brothers; Lillian Murret, Oswald's aunt; and John
W. Burcham, Emmett Charles Barbe, Jr., Hilda L. Smith, J. Rachal, Bobb
Hunley, Robert J. Creel, Helen P. Cunningham, Theodore Frank Gangl,
Gene Graves, and Robert L. Adams, who testified concerning Oswald's
employment history.



Contents


                                                           Page
    Preface                                                   v

    Testimony of--
      John Edward Pic                                         1
      Edward John Pic, Jr                                    82
      Kerry Wendell Thornley                                 82
      George B. Church, Jr                                  115
      Mrs. George B. Church, Jr                             116
      Billy Joe Lord                                        117
      Alexander Kleinlerer                                  118
      Mrs. Donald Gibson                                    123
      Ruth Hyde Paine                                  153, 389
      M. Waldo George                                       155
      William Kirk Stuckey                                  156
      Horace Elroy Twiford                                  179
      Estelle Twiford                                       179
      Virginia H. James                                     180
      James L. Ritchie                                      191
      Carroll Hamilton Seeley, Jr                           193
      Louis Feldsott                                        205
      J. Philip Lux                                         206
      Howard Leslie Brennan                                 206
      Albert C. Yeargan, Jr                                 207
      Louis Weinstock                                       207
      Vincent T. Lee                                        208
      Farrell Dobbs                                         208
      Virginia Gray                                         209
      Albert F. Staples                                     210
      Katherine Mallory                                     210
      Monica Kramer                                         212
      Rita Naman                                            213
      John Bryan McFarland and Meryl McFarland              214
      Pamela Mumford                                        215
      Dial Duwayne Ryder                                    224
      Hunter Schmidt, Jr                                    240
      Charles W. Greener                                    245
      Gertrude Hunter                                       253
      Edith Whitworth                                       262
      Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald, Edith Whitworth, and
          Gertrude Hunter                                   275
      Eugene D. Anderson                                    301
      James A. Zahm                                         306
      C. A. Hamblen                                         311
      Robert Gene Fenley                                    314
      Aubrey Lee Lewis                                      318
      Dean Adams Andrews, Jr                                325
      Evaristo Rodriguez                                    339
      Orest Pena                                            346
      Ruperto Pena                                          364
      Sylvia Odio                                           367
      Michael Ralph Paine                                   398
      Edwin A. Walker and Clyde J. Watts                    404
      Bernard Weissman                                      428
      Warren Allen Reynolds                                 434
      Priscilla Mary Post Johnson                           442
      Eric Rogers                                           460
      James Lehrer                                          464
      Bardwell D. Odum                                      468
      James R. Malley                                       468
      Richard Helms                                         469
      Peter Megargee Brown                                  470
      Gary Taylor                                           470
      Francis L. Martello                                   471
      John Corporon                                         471
      Mrs. J. V. Allen                                      472
      Lillian Murret                                        472
      John W. Burcham                                       473
      Emmett Charles Barbe, Jr                              473
      Hilda L. Smith                                        474
      J. Rachal                                             474
      Bobb Hunley                                           476
      Robert J. Creel                                       477
      Helen P. Cunningham                                   477
      Theodore Frank Gangl                                  478
      Gene Graves                                           479
      Robert L. Adams                                       480
      Ivan D. Lee                                           481
      James D. Crowley                                      482


EXHIBITS INTRODUCED

                                 Page
    Allen Exhibit No.:
       1                          472
       2                          472
       3                          472
       4                          472
       5                          472
       6                          472
       7                          472
       8                          472
       9                          472
      10                          472
      11                          472
      12                          472
      13                          472
      14                          472
      15                          472
    Anderson Exhibit No. 1        303
    Brown Exhibit No. 1           470
    Burcham Exhibit No.:
      1                           473
      2                           473
      3                           473
    Creel Exhibit No.:
      1                           477
      2                           477
      3                           477
      4                           477
      5                           477
      6                           477
      7                           477
      8                           477
    Cunningham Exhibit No. 4      477

    Gangl Exhibit No. 1           479
    Graves Exhibit No. 1          479
    Gray Exhibit No. 1            210
    Greener Exhibit No.:
      1                           246
      2                           247
      3                           251
      4                           251
    Hunley Exhibit No.:
      1                           476
      2                           476
      3                           476
      4                           476
      5                           476
      6                           476
      7                           476
    James Exhibit No.:
       1                          181
       2                          186
       3                          187
       3-A                        187
       4                          188
       5                          188
       6                          189
       7                          189
       8                          189
       9                          189
      10                          190
      11                          190
    Johnson Exhibit No.:
      1                           442
      2                           442
      3                           443
      4                           443
      5                           443
      6                           443
    Kramer Exhibit No.:
      1                           212
      2                           213
    Lee Exhibit:
      A                           482
      B                           482
    Lewis Exhibit No. 1           323
    Murret Exhibit No. 1          472
    Odio Exhibit No. 1            373
    Odum Exhibit No. 1            468
    Pena Exhibit No. 1            359
    Pic Exhibit No.:
       1                            5
       2                           13
       2-A                         15
       3                           14
       4                           15
       5                           15
       6                           66
       6-A                         66
       7                           66
       7-A                         66
       8                           66
       8-A                         66
       9                           66
       9-A                         66
      10                           66
      10-A                         66
      10-B                         66
      11                           66
      11-A                         66
      12                           66
      12-A                         66
      13                           66
      13-A                         66
      14                           66
      15                           66
      16                           66
      16-A                         66
      17                           66
      17-A                         66
      18                           66
      18-A                         66
      19                           66
      19-A                         66
      20                           66
      20-A                         66
      20-B                         66
      21                           67
      21-A                         67
      22                           67
      23                           67
      23-A                         67
      24                           67
      24-A                         67
      25                           67
      25-A                         67
      26                           67
      26-A                         67
      27                           69
      27-A                         69
      27-B                         69
      28-A                         69
      28-B                         69
      29-A                         69
      29-B                         69
      29-C                         69
      30-A                         69
      30-B                         69
      31-A                         69
      31-B                         69
      32-A                         69
      32-B                         70
      33-A                         70
      33-B                         70
      34                           70
      35-A                         70
      35-B                         70
      36-A                         70
      36-B                         70
      37-A                         71
      37-B                         71
      38-A                         71
      38-B                         71
      39-A                         71
      39-B                         71
      40-A                         71
      40-B                         71
      41-A                         71
      41-B                         71
      42-A                         71
      42-B                         71
      43-A                         71
      43-B                         71
      44-A                         71
      44-B                         71
      45-A                         71
      45-B                         71
      46-A                         71
      46-B                         71
      47-A                         71
      47-B                         71
      48                           35
      49                           35
      50                           29
      51                           29
      52                           28
      53                           28
      54                           30
      55                           30
      56                           36
      57                           36
      58                           36
      59                           35
      60                           60
    Rachal Exhibit No.:
      1                           475
      2                           476
      3                           476
    Rogers Exhibit No. 1          463
    Seeley Exhibit No.:
      1                           195
      2                           196
      3                           198
      4                           199
      5                           199
      6                           200
      7                           201
    Smith Exhibit No. 1           474
    Staples Exhibit No. 1         210
    Stuckey Exhibit No.:
      1                           161
      2                           163
      3                           169
      4                           177
    Thornley Exhibit No.:
      1                           112
      2                           113
      3                           114
    Twiford Exhibit No. 1         179
    Walker Exhibit No.:
      1                           408
      2                           409
      3                           411
      4                           411
    Weinstock Exhibit No. 1       207
    Weissman Exhibit No. 1        429



Hearings Before the President's Commission

on the

Assassination of President Kennedy



TESTIMONY OF JOHN EDWARD PIC

The testimony of John Edward Pic was taken at 10:25 a.m., on May
15, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Messrs.
John Hart Ely and Albert E. Jenner, Jr., assistant counsel of the
President's Commission.


Mr. JENNER. Sergeant Pic, do you swear in your testimony you are about
to give that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I do.

Mr. JENNER. State your full name, please.

Mr. PIC. Staff Sergeant John Edward Pic, sir, U.S. Air Force.

Mr. JENNER. And that Pic is spelled P-i-c-?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Give me your home address.

Mr. PIC. 7306 Westville, San Antonio, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. You are a married man?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Give the full name of your wife including her married name,
children, if any, ages and names and where born.

Mr. PIC. My wife's maiden name is Margaret Dorothy Fuhrman. My eldest
is John Edward Pic, Jr., 14 May, 1952. My daughter, Janet Ann Pic, 18
October 1954; James Michael Pic, 22 February 1960.

Mr. JENNER. Your wife Margaret is--she was born where?

Mr. PIC. New York City, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Her parents are native Americans as well as she?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; they are not.

Mr. JENNER. What do you know of them?

Mr. PIC. Her father died; I never met the man while we were going
together. Her mother and father were separated. Her mother was born in
Hungary, I think. Her father was also, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What do you understand as to when they came to this country?

Mr. PIC. I have never inquired. It has probably been mentioned but I
have forgotten.

Mr. JENNER. Was it your impression they had been here a good many years?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; they have seven children. The eldest being in her
forties, I am pretty sure.

Mr. JENNER. I see. When you met your wife she was living with her
mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Where?

Mr. PIC. 325 East 92d Street, New York City.

Mr. JENNER. And you were at that time in the service?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; U.S. Coast Guard, assigned to U.S. Coast Guard
Cutter _Rockaway_.

Mr. JENNER. How old is Mrs. Pic?

Mr. PIC. Thirty, sir. She turned 30 the 21st of December.

Mr. JENNER. Of 1963?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. She was born December 21, 1933?

Mr. PIC. It may be 22, sir; I never remember. I am giving sworn
testimony, I don't want to lie about my wife's birthday; it is either
the 21st or 22d, I am pretty sure it is the 21st.

Mr. JENNER. You are stationed where at present?

Mr. PIC. I am attached to Wilford Hall, USAF Hospital, Lackland Air
Force Base, San Antonio, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. Do you--what is your particular assignment?

Mr. PIC. I am NCOIC, Special Procedures Branch, Department of
Pathology, Wilford Hall Hospital. I have had this job since the 10th of
February this year, and my other ones, I had another job when I talked
to the Secret Service if you would be interested in that.

Mr. JENNER. How long have you been at Lackland?

Mr. PIC. I have been there since August 1962, sir.

Mr. JENNER. My information is you were born in New Orleans on January
17, 1932?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You entered the Coast Guard.

Mr. PIC. It was either 25 or 26 January 1950, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you were then 18 years of age?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that was where?

Mr. PIC. I processed my enlistment in Fort Worth. I was sworn into the
Coast Guard in Dallas, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. I think it might be well if we had your service history
all in one spot so you go ahead and for my benefit speak a little more
slowly so I can absorb it.

Mr. PIC. All right, sir. Approximately 26 January 1950, enlisted in
Coast Guard in Dallas, Tex.; from January 1950 until May 1950, I was
in boot camp at U.S. Coast Guard Training Station, Cape May, N.J. In
May 1950 until January 1951, I was attached to U.S. Coast Guard cutter
_Rockaway_. January 1951 until approximately June 1951 was stationed at
U.S. Coast Guard Training Station, Groton, Conn. From June 1951 until
January 1952, I was stationed at U.S. Coast Guard Base, St. George,
Staten Island, N.Y. From January 1952 until April 1952, I was stationed
at U.S. Naval Training Station, Bainbridge, Md. April 1952 until
February 1953, I was stationed at U.S. Coast Guard PSU, which is Port
Security Unit, Ellis Island, N.Y. February 1953 until September 1953, I
was stationed aboard the U.S. Coast Guard cutter _Firebush_.

Mr. JENNER. Were you at sea?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this was classified as sea duty. It was really a
buoy tender.

Mr. JENNER. In what area?

Mr. PIC. New York area, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Were you on ship all the time during that period?

Mr. PIC. We would go out a day, come back the next; back and forth.

Mr. JENNER. What I am really getting at is when you were ashore were
you home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I went home the minute I got off the ship.

Mr. JENNER. OK.

Mr. PIC. September 1953 until April 1954--these months I am pretty
sure, I am certain are OK.

Mr. JENNER. That is all right.

Mr. PIC. I was stationed at U.S. Naval Hospital, Portsmouth, Va.
My address when I lived there was, for 3 months we lived with my
sister-in-law in Norfolk.

Mr. JENNER. Name her, please.

Mr. PIC. Mrs. Emma Parrish, I believe.

Mr. JENNER. That was your wife's sister?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir. Then in January of 1954 we moved over to
Portsmouth, Va., 1234 Holliday Street.

April 1954 for about 2, 3 weeks, I was then stationed again at St.
George, Staten Island, and I received orders through the Coast Guard
cutter _Halfmoon_, and I was on the Coast Guard cutter _Halfmoon_ until
January 1956.

Mr. JENNER. And at sea or----

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this was weather patrol duty.

Mr. JENNER. You did come ashore when you got home?

Mr. PIC. We pulled weather patrol, sir. We would be out 5 or 6 weeks
and we would be in 5 or 6 weeks; and this I tolerated for 21 months.
On 1 February 1956, I joined the Air Force. I joined the Air Force on
Staten Island, N.Y. My address at this time was 80 St. Marks Place,
Staten Island, N.Y.

Mr. JENNER. In a few words, what was that transition. Had you
appeared----

Mr. PIC. My enlistment from the Coast Guard was complete, sir, and I
decided that staying in the Coast Guard for 20 or some odd years I
wouldn't see much of my family and I understood the Air Force was a
family man's outfit and I figured that was for me. So the day after I
got out of the Coast Guard I joined the Air Force--no broken service. I
was stationed at Mitchel Air Force Base, Hempstead, Long Island, N.Y.,
until October, end of September, October 1958, and received orders to
Japan, APO 323, Tachikawa, Japan.

Mr. JENNER. What year were you in?

Mr. PIC. 1958 when I received my orders.

Mr. JENNER. At this time when you were assigned to Japan, that was the
period of time also when your brother Lee Oswald, then in the Marines,
was also stationed in Japan?

Mr. PIC. To the best of my knowledge; yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Were you aware of that fact when you were stationed in
Japan?

Mr. PIC. When I received my orders, I was under the impression he was
in Korea, sir. I knew he was overseas in the Japanese-Korean area.

Mr. JENNER. Had you had any communication from him prior to your going
to Japan?

Mr. PIC. To the best of my knowledge, sir, sometime after he entered
the service and went overseas I received a letter from him, very short
note. He wrote a very short note. I no longer have this.

Mr. JENNER. He entered the service in October of 1956?

Mr. PIC. I was in the Air Force at Mitchel Air Force Base at the time.
Do you want me to finish with my military dates, and then I can go back?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. November 1958, 10 November 1958 until 17 July, 1962, I was
stationed in Japan. In August 1962 until the present date assigned to
Lackland, Wilford Hall Air Force Hospital, Lackland Air Force Base.

Now, in the time period from--my mother paid us a Christmas visit, sir,
during the Christmas holidays of 1957, I believe, after Lee had joined
the Marine Corps.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; that would be a little over a year, that would be a
year and 2 months after he had joined the Marine Corps.

Mr. PIC. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Where were you at that time?

Mr. PIC. I was stationed at Mitchel Air Force Base, sir, and I believe
my address was 105 Avenue C, East Meadow, Long Island. I was living
right next to the Air Force base.

Mr. JENNER. Had you known prior to that time, which presumably you did,
that Lee had entered the service?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I knew this.

Mr. JENNER. Had enlisted in the Marines?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And how had you learned that, through your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; through my mother.

Mr. JENNER. Had you learned that at or about the time he actually
enlisted? What were the circumstances?

Mr. PIC. Concerning what, sir?

Mr. JENNER. His enlistment, when you learned about it, and how. He
enlisted in October 1956. He was then 17 years old.

Mr. PIC. My mother told me some way or another, I don't remember, sir.
This is how I learned about it, either by phone call or by letter or
some way. Of course, I knew he would do it as soon as he reached the
age.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Why did you know he would do it and tell us
the circumstances upon which you, the facts upon which you base that
observation?

Mr. PIC. He did it for the same reasons that I did it and Robert did
it, I assume, to get from out and under.

Mr. JENNER. Out and under what?

Mr. PIC. The yoke of oppression from my mother.

Mr. JENNER. Had that been a matter of discussion between you and for
example, between you and your brother Robert?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; it was just something we understood about and never
discussed.

Mr. JENNER. And that would include Lee as well as your brother Robert;
that is, you were all aware of it?

Mr. PIC. I know this includes my brother Robert. Of course, when I was
18 years old I didn't discuss things like this with Lee, who was much
younger.

Mr. JENNER. Please elaborate on that. You made a general statement----

Mr. PIC. OK.

Mr. JENNER. Which lawyers would call a mixed matter of conclusion and
of fact and we would like to know the circumstances in general.

Mr. PIC. OK.

Mr. JENNER. They would probably go back for a good many years and it
involves a personality.

Mr. PIC. Well, why don't I start with the death of Lee's father, and I
think really starting there I can tell you more of my own feelings and
so forth. I can make one statement but to bring out the circumstances I
think I should go back a little further.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I will come back to this eventually. I will
start you off this way. You are the brother of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you are also the brother of Robert?

Mr. PIC. Robert Lee Edward Oswald, Jr.

Mr. JENNER. Robert Lee Edward Oswald?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I notice in your statements that you refer to him as Robert
Lee Edward Oswald. There are some references by others to Robert E. Lee
Oswald.

Mr. PIC. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Your stepfather is generally referred to in the record and
by witnesses as Lee Oswald. What was his full name?

Mr. PIC. To the best of my knowledge, sir, it was Robert Lee Edward
Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. In any event your brother Robert was a junior.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Your brother Robert was born April 7, 1934; is that to the
best of your recollection?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; to the best of my recollection.

Mr. JENNER. And your brother Lee Harvey Oswald, October 18, 1939?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, air.

Mr. JENNER. Your father's name?

Mr. PIC. Edward John Pic, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You are named after him except----

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The two surnames were reversed?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I think it appears on here. Yes, sir; I think it
appears on here. Yes, sir. John Pic, Jr., in fact his name is----

Mr. JENNER. Edward John Pic, Jr.

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. And your mother was Marguerite Claverie Oswald?

Mr. PIC. Claverie, Marguerite Frances.

Mr. JENNER. And your mother and father were married what date?

Mr. PIC. Eighth day of August 1929, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you are now reading from what?

Mr. PIC. The marriage certificate of Edward John Pic, Jr., and Mrs.
Marguerite Frances Claverie.

Mr. JENNER. That is a marriage certificate that you, that is among your
personal papers?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I am going to put an exhibit number on it. We will take a
photograph of it and return the original to you.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Mr. Reporter, would you mark that as John Pic Exhibit No. 1.

(John Pic Exhibit No. 1 was marked for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. I offer in evidence as John Pic Exhibit No. 1, a marriage
certificate certified and dated August 8, 1929, reflecting the marriage
of Edward John Pic, Jr. and Miss Marguerite Frances Claverie on the 1st
day of August 1929, in Harrison County, Miss. The marriage certificate
does not show the town.

Sergeant, do you have any recollection of your father?

Mr. PIC. My own father?

Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir.

Mr. PIC. No, sir, I don't.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection of ever having seen your
father?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I don't.

Mr. JENNER. You were too young at the time but you eventually became
aware of the fact that your mother, Marguerite, and your father,
Edward, were divorced not long after your birth?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you become aware also of the fact that at the time of
your birth that your father and mother were separated?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. This is the first information, I take it, then, in the
utterance I have just made?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That you have become aware that your mother and your father
were separated at the time of your birth?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You did learn about that?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. From your mother?

Mr. PIC. From Life magazine, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I see. Well, that is what I was really getting at.

Mr. PIC. O.K.

Mr. JENNER. It was only in the last 6 or 8 months that you learned that
at the time of your birth your mother and your father were separated?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir. I had always been told that they were
divorced because he didn't want children. I didn't know anything else
but that. I didn't know the time periods or anything else, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Your stepfather, when your mother and your stepfather--I
will call him Lee Oswald because all the witnesses have referred to him
as Lee Oswald, is that what he was called, do you have any recollection
of it?

Mr. PIC. I remember him being referred to as Mr. Oswald, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Mr. Oswald?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have a recollection at the time, at least--that
is an inelegant question. Do you recall your mother then marrying Lee
Oswald or Mr. Oswald?

Mr. PIC. I knew they were married, I don't recall the marriage ceremony.

Mr. JENNER. What do you recall about him, sergeant?

Mr. PIC. I recall he was an insurance salesman, sir, for the
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. He used to take me on his rounds for
collections sometimes. He was very strict with us. We got whippings
when we were bad.

Mr. JENNER. You don't mean to claim that any of them was undeserved?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. Not in the least.

Mr. JENNER. I should say this to you, I think. The witnesses all,
everybody spoke well of your stepfather.

Mr. PIC. That is how I remember him, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You were born in New Orleans?

Mr. PIC. I was?

Mr. JENNER. I am really putting a question mark at the end.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I was born at New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. And the family lived in New Orleans?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Were you ever informed by anybody as to the business of
your father, not your stepfather but your----

Mr. PIC. My real father?

Mr. JENNER. Yes; or occupation?

Mr. PIC. From what I was told he was a stevedore and had once been a
professional basketball player. This is all I remember ever hearing
about him.

Mr. JENNER. And this was information that came from primarily your
mother?

Mr. PIC. From my mother; yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. As a boy as you grew up in New Orleans were you advised
whether your father was alive, whether he was in New Orleans or where
he was or anything about him in that connection?

Mr. PIC. Being the nosy child I was, every once in a while I would look
him up in the phone book so I knew he existed.

Mr. JENNER. Did you make any inquiries to find out what his business
was or occupation?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever make any attempt to go to where he might be
working or living to see what he looked like?

Mr. PIC. I thought of it several times but I never made an attempt.

Mr. JENNER. Were you influenced in this in any respect by your mother?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. I do remember on several occasions when we would
visit the Lillian Murrets the name would come up that he had visited
them, they would see him now and then and, of course, every time this
cropped up it made me more inquisitive.

Mr. JENNER. You mentioned Lillian Murret, that is your aunt, your
mother's sister?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And her husband is Charles "Dutz" Murret?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. In those early years, did your family reside somewhere near
the Murrets? I am going to get into all those addresses if I can, but I
am thinking of the overall relationship geographically.

Mr. PIC. As I recollect, the house was where Mr. Oswald died, all I
know is that it was on the corner of Alvez and Galvez.

Mr. JENNER. 2109 Alvar?

Mr. PIC. There you go. I think the street that ran next to it was
Galvez.

Mr. JENNER. You are correct.

Mr. PIC. This is the first real--I remember a first real house prior to
this, where it was, sir, I don't know. I was about 5 at the time.

Mr. JENNER. But the first one you remember is the house on the corner
that you have mentioned?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do any of these addresses refresh your recollection? 2205
Alvar?

Mr. PIC. It may be the address of the house on Alvez and Galvez, I
don't know.

Mr. JENNER. No?

Mr. PIC. I don't know, sir. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. 2123 Alvar?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. 1661 Paul Morphy?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. 2132 Gallier?

Mr. PIC. The name, the streets sound--I may have heard it before.

Mr. JENNER. 1917 Gallier?

Mr. PIC. Only the street sounds familiar.

Mr. JENNER. 805 Greenwood?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. 220 North--my pronunciation will be bad--Telemachus.

Mr. PIC. No.

Mr. JENNER. 123 South Cortez?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You had to get away yesterday before a letter arrived
which is at your base now, from Mr. Rankin, general counsel for the
Commission, confirming arrangements for you to appear and have your
deposition taken before the Commission, and enclosing with that letter
copies of the legislation being Senate Joint Resolution No. 137
authorizing the creation of the Commission, and a copy of President
Johnson's Executive Orders bringing the Commission into existence No.
11130, and a copy of the rules and regulations of the Commission itself
for the taking of depositions.

When you return to Lackland base you will find that letter probably in
the possession of your Commanding Officer, and he will deliver it to
you.

The Commission was authorized by the resolution I have mentioned and
brought into existence by the President to investigate the facts
and circumstances involved in and surrounding the assassination of
President Kennedy on November 22, 1963, and we have understood from
witnesses and other information we have, that you had and still have
information bearing upon the facts and circumstances relative to that
assassination, and it is this line of questioning that is directed
toward that.

We appreciate your appearing voluntarily from Lackland base to appear
here today.

That letter, and the enclosures state that you are entitled to counsel
if you want counsel present, and if you desire to have counsel present
I can suspend this now.

Mr. PIC. I have nothing to hide, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Go ahead, John.

Mr. ELY. I just wanted to check on a couple of addresses with you, sir.
914 Hennesey, do you remember that?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. ELY. What about Taft Place?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You attended William Frantz Elementary School in Dallas,
did you not?

Mr. PIC. New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. With your brother, Robert?

Mr. PIC. What grade was I in, sir. He was two grades behind me. If I
was in the third, he was there. If I wasn't, he wasn't.

Mr. JENNER. Well, the record shows you enrolled in William Frantz
School at 3811 North Galvez on the 16th of September 1936 at which time
you were 4-1/2 years old.

Mr. PIC. Well, he wouldn't be there.

Mr. JENNER. Not at that time. He was then 2-1/2.

Do you recall transferring from William Frantz Elementary School to
George Washington Elementary School?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I do.

Mr. JENNER. Was that some time in late September or in November,
perhaps of 1940.

Mr. PIC. Well, prior to that we went to another place, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Your first elementary school was William Frantz?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you attended William Frantz until when, to the best of
your recollection?

Mr. PIC. I don't think I attended William Frantz after----

Mr. JENNER. The death of your stepfather?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; somewhere around there. We went to a boarding school
over in Gretna, La. Infant Jesus College was the name of it, I believe,
both Robert and I, and we hated the place.

Mr. JENNER. That was a very short period of time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; because we hated the place.

Mr. JENNER. I will get to that in a moment.

Mr. PIC. I don't know whether it was before Washington or after. I
think it was before Washington.

Mr. JENNER. Perhaps I can refresh your recollection this way. Your
stepfather died in August of 1939. You were then living in the house at
the corner of Alvar and Galvez which you recall as Alvez and Galvez.

Do you recall that some months after the death of your father and in
the following year, the late winter or early spring, that you moved
from that house?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall a physician by the name of Mancuso?

Mr. PIC. It may or may not be familiar, sir. I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. He was the doctor who delivered Lee, and also the man who
rented the house in which you had been living. Do you recall that?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You do recall leaving that house in which you had been
living at the time of the death of your stepfather?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; sometime afterward.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall that it was a matter of months and not a
matter of years?

Mr. PIC. It had to be months, sir, because I have got something else
for 1940 here.

Mr. JENNER. When you moved from the house in which you had been living
at the time of the death of your stepfather, do you recall moving to
1242 Congress Street?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. I remember moving to a Bartholomew Street.

Mr. JENNER. That Bartholomew Street, I will get to that in a moment,
perhaps to refresh your recollection was a little house that your
mother purchased on contract.

Mr. PIC. What, Bartholomew?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. I remember that house.

Mr. JENNER. 1010 Bartholomew.

Mr. PIC. That could be it, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Before you moved to 1010 Bartholomew you lived, did you
not, at 1242 Congress?

Mr. PIC. I don't remember, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Your mother didn't sell the Alvar Street house until
January of 1944.

Mr. PIC. I thought it was sold the day we moved out.

Mr. JENNER. It was rented by Dr. Mancuso the day you moved out, and
ultimately your mother regained possession in January 1944, and he then
purchased that house substantially contemporaneously, in January of
1944.

Mr. PIC. Can I ask you a question?

Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir.

Mr. PIC. Being Mr. Oswald was in the insurance business, and being I
was rather young, how did he leave her, I have no idea.

Mr. JENNER. Well, I will answer that question. You tell me what you
thought at the time and what your impression now is.

Mr. PIC. Well, he didn't leave her much is what I was told.

Mr. JENNER. Was that the feeling you had at the time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Well, he did leave a small insurance policy, and the house
on Alvar, on the corner of Alvar and Galvez, which was being purchased
under contract, and that is about all.

I take it, it is your recollection, Sergeant, that when you and your
mother and Robert and Lee, who was then an infant child, just a few
months old, left the house on 2109 Alvar you entered some institution.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And what is your recollection of that institution?

Mr. PIC. I believe it was in Gretna, La.

Mr. JENNER. Spell that for the reporter.

Mr. PIC. G-r-e-t-n-a, a whole bunch of little towns right across the
river from New Orleans, West Wego, and a couple of others, that was one
of these, I think it was Gretna, it might be in one of that group.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. And the name of the school was Infant Jesus College and it was
a Catholic school, sir. And us not being Catholics they lowered the
boom on us.

Mr. JENNER. That would be you and your brother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you were at that time just about 8 years old. Was it
before your 8th birthday or what?

Mr. PIC. I wouldn't remember that, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It was in 1940, however?

Mr. PIC. I thought it was in the end of 1939. It is either the end of
1939 or early 1940.

Mr. JENNER. Is it your recollection that----

Mr. PIC. We were still living on Alvez and Galvez when we went to that
school.

Mr. JENNER. All right. That is what I wanted to straighten out.

Your mother put you and Robert in the Catholic boarding school before
the family actually moved out of the 2109 Alvar home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. How long were you boys at that Catholic
institution?

Mr. PIC. My best recollection is that it was to the end of the school
year, 1940.

Mr. JENNER. That would be the summer of 1940?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Your mother was not working at that time, was
she?

Mr. PIC. As far as I know; no, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What is your recollection as to why you were placed in that
institution inasmuch as your mother was not working, and at that time
you were still living or she was, with Lee at 2109 Alvar?

Mr. PIC. My impression then, sir; I don't know, I can give you my
impressions now----

Mr. JENNER. Are these impressions that you are about to give me and
I do want you to give them to me, gathered from recollection of the
course of events over a period of years?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Based on discussions in the family over a period
of years?

Mr. PIC. Based mainly on experiences in contact with my mother over a
period of years, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right; tell us about them.

Mr. PIC. I think it was probably because it was cheaper to maintain
Robert and I over at this school than it was to maintain us at home. I
mean we boarded there, they fed us, went to school. I don't know what
the fee was but this was the impression I have now.

Mr. JENNER. While you boys were at the Catholic school, did your mother
and Lee leave, if you have a recollection of this, the 2109 Alvar home?
This would be sometime between the first of January 1940, and the time
you finished the second semester, let us say.

Mr. PIC. If this house between Alvez and Bartholomew is a green house.

Mr. JENNER. Green?

Mr. PIC. Green, I can remember it. You can tell me if it was green, I
don't know, sir. I remember a green house somewhere in this time period.

Mr. JENNER. Let me get at that this way. You and Robert were lodged
eventually in the Bethlehem----

Mr. PIC. Bethlehem Orphans Home, somewhere on St. Peters Street, New
Orleans. I think this was in 1942, though, this happened.

Mr. JENNER. Evangelical Lutheran Bethlehem Orphan Asylum.

Mr. PIC. Right. That is the name.

Mr. JENNER. Known as the Bethlehem Children's Home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And--all right, now, you entered there on the 3d of January
1942. Is that your recollection?

Mr. PIC. That is my recollection.

Mr. JENNER. The winter of 1942?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I know it was a little bit after the war was
declared.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, taking that date, January 1942, and going
back----

Mr. PIC. OK.

Mr. JENNER. To the end of the school year in 1940----

Mr. PIC. Well, the school in September 1940--I think I put in about
a year and a half in this Washington Elementary School after we were
taken out of Infant Jesus College.

Mr. JENNER. At that time didn't you live at 1242 Congress Street in New
Orleans?

Mr. PIC. Sir, if you have a map of New Orleans and show me where this
is maybe I can remember, but I don't remember anything but Bartholomew.

Mr. JENNER. For the purposes of refreshing your recollection the
records of the public school system of New Orleans reflect the
following: that you were enrolled at William Frantz School located at
3811 North Galvez when you were 4-1/2 years old on September 16, 1936.
You continued there thereafter until September 5, 1940.

Mr. PIC. September 1940.

Mr. JENNER. These records would show that you were discharged from the
William Frantz Elementary School on January 2, 1940.

Mr. PIC. That is better.

Mr. JENNER. And that you reentered William Frantz on September 5, 1940,
and you transferred to George Washington Elementary School on November
12, 1940.

At the time of the transfer you lived at 1242 Congress Street. Your
mother purchased the house at 1010 Bartholomew on the 5th of March
1941. And she sold it on the 16th of January 1942.

With that information, does that serve to refresh your recollection
that the course of circumstances might have been these. I will state
them and then you correct me. I don't want you to take my word for it
but this is solely for the purpose of refreshing your recollection, if
it does refresh your recollection.

Your stepfather died in August of 1939. In the winter of 1940, early,
sometime in January 1940, your mother took you and your brother,
Robert, out of school, you were in the William Frantz Elementary School
at that time, and placed you in the Catholic school.

Mr. PIC. I think prior or right after this Catholic school there was
another school which was in downtown New Orleans. It was a day school.
She would bring us there in the morning and take us home at night. I
don't remember too much. We didn't stay there very long.

Mr. JENNER. It is your definite recollection, however, that you were
at the Catholic orphanage school in the winter of 1940, which would be
approximately 5 months after the death of your stepfather.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I don't make that statement. I make the statement
that it is my definite recollection I was in the Infant Jesus College
School while we lived in this house on Alvez. What months these were,
sir, I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. And it is the best of your recollection at the present time
that that was the school period ending in the summer of 1940?

Mr. PIC. I think so, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What is your recollection as to the school you attended
commencing the school year September 1940? Did you return to William
Frantz?

Mr. PIC. I went to George Washington--if I was there at William Frantz,
I don't remember. Well, the dates you give me it would be----

Mr. JENNER. A short time?

Mr. PIC. Right. I remember George Washington.

Mr. JENNER. Were you living at home at that time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was that 1242 Congress?

Mr. PIC. I don't know, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Would a map of New Orleans help you any?

Mr. PIC. Possible; I don't remember this Congress, I remember a green
house, this was a green house I remember. What street it was on, I
don't know. But I do remember something about a green house.

Mr. JENNER. Was it in the French quarter, in the old city?

Mr. PIC. The way I remember the French quarter is down in here
somewhere, and this is certainly not the French quarter. Here is this
Gretna. It may be in Algiers that Infant Jesus, one of these two,
either Gretna or Algiers. I think it was Gretna.

Mr. JENNER. Your mother said it was Algiers, and there is evidence that
it was located in Algiers.

Mr. PIC. OK, sir; Algiers. I know it was across the river.

Mr. JENNER. You do have a recollection, however, of living in a house
on Bartholomew?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you happen to remember, you don't remember now the exact
address?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It was at 1010 Bartholomew. Did you live in the 1010
Bartholomew house?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was it before or during, or when was it with respect to
when you and Robert entered the Bethlehem Orphanage?

Mr. PIC. We was living there when I went to Washington.

Mr. JENNER. George Washington Elementary School at 3810 St. Cloud?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Our records show your mother purchased the 1010 Bartholomew
property in March of 1941, March 9 to be exact.

Mr. PIC. When I was at Infant Jesus College, I couldn't very well
remember that Congress Street because I probably--we wasn't living
there.

Mr. JENNER. You weren't living----

Mr. PIC. At home.

Mr. JENNER. No.

Mr. PIC. So, I am afraid I can't remember that Congress Street address.
I remember a green house.

Mr. JENNER. A green house.

Mr. PIC. Yes; that is about the best I can do.

Mr. JENNER. In any event it was a house different from or other than
the 2109 Alvar?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. In which you were living at the time of the death of your
stepfather?

Mr. PIC. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That is good enough. You remember being with your brother
Robert in the Bethlehem Orphanage?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And your initial utterance voluntarily was that you entered
there in 1942.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; it was right after the war.

Mr. JENNER. The records show that it was in the month of January
1942. You were then 10 years old so you might have some reasonable
recollection of it. Tell us the circumstances and what you understand
about it.

Mr. PIC. Well, while we lived on this Bartholomew Street my mother
opened in the front room a little store called Oswald's Notion Shop. I
think she sold spools of thread and needles and things like this.

Mr. JENNER. Did she sell any sweets or candy for children?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I remember we used to go in there and swipe it.

Mr. JENNER. Was your mother working at that time other than managing or
operating this little notions and sweet shop?

Mr. PIC. Not that I remember, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And it was in a segment of the home at 1010 Bartholomew?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; it was the very front room.

Mr. JENNER. And you boys were then attending school where?

Mr. PIC. Washington.

Mr. JENNER. When I say you boys, it is your brother Robert and yourself.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I am sure Robert was attending school then. It was
Washington.

Mr. JENNER. Yes. Your brother Robert entered grammar school on
September 8, 1938. That was William Frantz so he was of school age at
the time we are talking about.

Describe that little house to us on Bartholomew. Was it a new house?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; it wasn't new. I guess it had about a minimum of two
bedrooms, rather large back yard. We had a dog, and the dog's name was
Sunshine. There was a fence ran down it. I remember the house.

Mr. JENNER. Was it a nice neighborhood?

Mr. PIC. It wasn't as nice as Alvez and Galvez.

Mr. JENNER. At that time. I see. Now, you lead me to ask something I
should have asked heretofore, tell me about the neighborhood at 2109
Alvar. What do you recall about that?

Mr. PIC. They were all brand new houses. In fact, I think we were the
first ones to move in on the street, and most of the other ones were
under construction there. William Frantz was building a new school. It
was a rather nice neighborhood. Middle income, I guess, at that time.

Mr. JENNER. And the 1010 Bartholomew home was not as new and the
neighborhood was not quite the same as at 2109 Alvar, but what kind
of a neighborhood was it? Was it a reasonably nice place, area? You
describe it. Don't ever let me put words in your mouth.

Mr. PIC. Well, digging back in my sociology courses, I would say it was
upper-lower class, if there is such a classification.

Mr. JENNER. Do you remember any neighbors at 1010 Bartholomew?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; there was a milkman, his name was Bud. Right on the
other corner from Bartholomew, on St. Cloud was a theater, I think was
called the Nola, and he lived behind this theater, he was our milkman,
and my mother and his wife and him were rather friendly, and we used to
go on trips on the weekends to the parks and things like this.

Mr. JENNER. Now, I ask you again what you recall to have been the
circumstances under which you entered the Bethlehem Orphanage, you and
your brother Robert?

Mr. PIC. I can only give you impressions, I have now, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Are these impressions that you gained now, gained from an
attempt to refresh your recollection?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. As to the circumstances at that time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. I think properly the notion store wasn't a booming business,
and she had to go to work and since we were reminded we were orphans
all the time, the right place to be would be in an orphan home.

Mr. JENNER. Your mother did remind you repeatedly that you were orphans?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That sort of thing. Would you elaborate on that, please?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir; she constantly reminded us we were orphans, that
she didn't have the money to support us in everything, and she opened a
notion store to make money, and she wasn't making money, and I remember
she closed it and went to work at about the same time that we entered
Bethlehem.

Mr. JENNER. In January 1942, Lee was a little over 2 years old, is that
correct; he was born October 1939.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You were then 10 and your brother Robert was 8, I am
talking about approximate ages now.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I think you entered Bethlehem before your tenth birthday.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And a few months before his eighth birthday. Did Lee
eventually join you at Bethlehem?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; he did. The exact date I don't remember. I know
he was there for only a matter of months. He wasn't there as long as
Robert and I was.

Mr. JENNER. I show you a document I will have marked as John Pic
Exhibit No. 2, please, for purposes of identification which appears
to be a Xerox reproduction of an application blank executed by Mrs.
Marguerite Oswald and related minutes for admission of Lee Oswald to
the Evangelical Lutheran Bethlehem Orphan Asylum Association, dated at
New Orleans, December 26, 1942, and showing entry of Lee Oswald into
the orphanage asylum on the 26th day of December 1942.

(John Pic Exhibit No. 2 was marked for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. Sergeant, I direct your attention to the line on which
appears what purports to be the signature of "Mrs. Marguerite Oswald."
You are familiar with the handwriting, are you not?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Of your mother Marguerite?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And with her signature?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Drawing on that familiarity, is that signature the
signature of your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I offer in evidence the document now identified as John Pic
Exhibit No. 2.

Having done that, Sergeant, does that refresh your recollection as to
the time when your brother Lee Oswald was admitted to the orphanage
asylum?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall it to have been sometime in late 1942 or
thereabout?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What is your recollection as to when he was--he joined you
at the orphan asylum.

Mr. PIC. I remember we were there a while, sir. He came, and to the
best of my recollection he didn't stay but 6 months at the longest, and
left again. I don't think--he wasn't there as long as we were.

Mr. JENNER. I direct your attention, Sergeant, to the fact your mother
has listed on this application her address as 111 Sherwood Forest Drive.

Mr. PIC. That address is familiar to me. Sherwood Forest Drive part of
it, the numbers are not.

Mr. JENNER. I wouldn't expect you to remember the exact number but the
street you do recall?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I do. In fact, the Murrets lived on the same street.

Mr. JENNER. Is it your impression then that the address of 111 Sherwood
Forest Drive was probably the address of the Murrets?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I wouldn't say that.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall your mother moving out of 1010 Bartholomew?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And so that it is your recollection that sometime between
your entry into the Bethlehem Orphanage at which time the family lived
at 1010 Bartholomew, that your mother and Lee or at least your mother
left, it must have been your mother and Lee, left the 1010 Bartholomew
residence and moved to another home on Sherwood Drive?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that. You put it in sequence as best you can.

Mr. PIC. If there was anything between Bartholomew and Sherwood Forest
Drive, I don't remember, sir. I do remember the Sherwood Forest Drive
house, and if I remember right it was three or four doors down from the
Murrets.

Mr. JENNER. Where would that be in your recollection with respect to
Bartholomew?

Mr. PIC. Oh, that is way across town, sir. That is in the city park
area. In fact, it was only a block from city park.

Mr. JENNER. And Lee was then--your mother had him with her because at
this time, December 1942, he was just a little over 3 years old.

Mr. PIC. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. The records show that the 1010 Bartholomew home was sold
on the 16th of January 1942. Does that refresh your recollection as to
sequence that prior to her sale of the house she moved out of the house
and over to Sherwood Drive and the placing of you boys in the Bethlehem
orphanage school was all part of the picture? She sold the Bartholomew
house, entered you boys in the orphanage in January 1942.

Mr. PIC. You want to know if I think she sold the house before we were
placed in the home?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. I don't know, sir.

Mr. JENNER. But after you were in the home, that is the Bethlehem
Orphanage Home that house was disposed of in some fashion at least?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And she moved into another house on Sherwood Drive?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By the way, do you remember anybody, an uncle of yours by
the name of John Oswald?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Or----

Mr. PIC. I remember an uncle on my stepfather's side. I don't recall
his name, sir.

Mr. JENNER. W. S. Oswald, is that familiar to you?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. But other than an uncle on your stepfather's side, that is
you don't recall his name, his first name?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. His name was Oswald, though?

Mr. PIC. I know it was on his side, sir. It may have been his sister, I
don't know. Maybe his brother-in-law.

Mr. JENNER. But you don't know.

I will identify as John Pic Exhibit No. 3 another application blank,
this one dated January 3, 1942, for admission of Robert Edward Oswald,
Jr., to the Evangelical Lutheran Bethlehem Orphan Asylum, which is
dated January 3, 1942, and direct you, Sergeant to the signature
appearing on that exhibit reading "Mrs. Lee Oswald." Are you familiar
with that signature?

Mr. PIC. That is the first time I have ever seen her use the word "Lee."

Mr. JENNER. But the handwriting; that is her handwriting?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I offer in evidence a document now identified as John Pic
Exhibit No. 3.

(John Pic Exhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. Now, directing your attention to that exhibit which shows
the entry of your brother Robert in the orphanage asylum on January 3,
1942, is it a fact that you and your brother Robert entered the asylum
at the same time?

Mr. PIC. To the best of my recollection, yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I direct your attention to this. There appears in the line
designated "mother" written in longhand Marguerite Claverie Oswald,
address, 1010 Bartholomew, and then right above it there is written 831
Pauline Street--January 28.

Do you recall your mother moving with Lee to a place on Pauline Street
in January of 1942?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All you recall is that she and Lee did move to a place,
another place from the 1010 Bartholomew address?

Mr. PIC. Well, it shows it there. I thought it was Sherwood Forest, I
don't know.

Mr. JENNER. It might have been shortly after that?

Mr. PIC. This is not familiar at all, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is the 831 Pauline Street address is not at all
familiar?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Is any of this application blank, that is any of the
longhand on it, in the hand of your mother other than her signature?

Mr. PIC. I wouldn't know, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Your religion is Lutheran, is it not?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you were baptized in the Lutheran church, were you not?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Your recollection is that your brother Lee was taken from
the orphanage home before you and Robert were?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You were released in June of 1944?

Mr. PIC. I have--I may have. If you say it was June, sir, OK. It was
May or June.

Mr. JENNER. May or June of 1944. And does it refresh your recollection
that your brother Lee was released from that home the previous January,
as a matter of fact on----

Mr. PIC. He didn't go when we went and he didn't leave, all I know is
he didn't enter when we entered and he didn't leave when we left. It
was between those periods the best I can state.

Mr. JENNER. The record (Pic Exhibit) shows he was released from the
home on the 19th of January, 1944 (Pic Exhibit No. 2A), and that he
entered the home on the 26th of December, 1942 (Pic Exhibit No. 2).

So he was there 2 years.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; that is not right.

Mr. JENNER. That doesn't square with your recollection, you mean?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. He may have been in and out of there off and on but
he didn't spend full time there that long. You see she may have pulled
him out there for a couple of weeks to stay with the Murrets, and
things or even longer and still have him charged against Bethlehem.

Mr. JENNER. I misspoke when I said 2 years. It would be the period from
December 26, 1942, to January 29, 1944, which is 1 year and 1 month.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; that would only be a year and 1 month.

Mr. JENNER. For the record then that span of time for your brother
between January 29, 1944, when he was released, and December 26, 1942,
when he entered is approximately 13 months.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is about what you remember, isn't it?

Mr. PIC. Well, I remember it about 6 months. But I guess that is right.
I know he wasn't in there a full 13 months at a clip. He was in and out
of there in 13 months. At that school if your parents wanted to take
you home for a couple or 3 weeks they took you home for a couple or 3
weeks.

Mr. JENNER. And you do remember your mother did that?

Mr. PIC. Sure, I am sure he stayed at the Murrets also.

Mr. JENNER. Well, the Murrets recall that. Now, I show you an exhibit
which we will identify as John Pic Exhibit No. 4 which for purposes of
identification is a Xerox duplication of a letter from Mrs. Marguerite
Oswald to the Reverend Harold of the Evangelical Lutheran Orphanage
Asylum dated February 1, 1945, addressed 4801 Victor, Dallas, Tex.

It is in longhand. Would you please examine it for the purpose of
answering a question I will put to you as to whether it is in the
handwriting of your mother?

Mr. PIC. It appears to me, sir; to be her handwriting.

Mr. JENNER. I offer in evidence John Pic Exhibit No. 4.

(John Pic Exhibit No. 4 was marked for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. I have marked as John Pic Exhibit No. 5 another application
for admission to Evangelical Lutheran Bethlehem Orphan Asylum
Association dated December 23, 1942, for the admission of John Edward
Pic and Robert Oswald to that orphanage, but the information on the
application is confined to John Edward Pic.

Unfortunately, Mr. Pic, this application, for some reason by oversight
was not signed by your mother. Do you remember a pastor by the name of
Rev. J. H. Nau?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. At the Redeemer Lutheran Church?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By the way, Mr. Reporter, for purposes of the record, there
appears on this application the fact that the marriage of Sergeant
Pic's mother Marguerite and his father Edward John Pic, Jr. was at
Gulfport, La.

Mr. PIC. Mississippi.

Mr. JENNER. No, it says Gulfport, La. here and should have been
Gulfport, Miss.?

Mr. PIC. Yes; Mississippi.

Mr. JENNER. Do you remember a pastor by the name of Reverend Scherer?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The Trinity Evangelical Church.

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you remember a Rev. M. R. Lecron?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Of the Redeemer Church?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By the way, all you boys were christened in the Lutheran
church, faith, were you not?

Mr. PIC. I don't know or remember if Lee was. I don't know about Lee.

Mr. JENNER. The record of the Bethlehem Children's Home show that he
was baptized by the Rev. M. R. Lecron of the Redeemer Lutheran Church.
The exact date, however, is not given.

Mr. PIC. They even have his birthday wrong there.

Mr. JENNER. 1 day. They have it as the 19th whereas it was 18th. As a
matter of fact, your mother on one of her papers fixes it on the 19th.

Mr. PIC. So does one of the letters.

Mr. JENNER. I offer John Pic Exhibit No. 5 in evidence.

(John Pic Exhibit No. 5 was marked for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. We will adjourn now and reconvene at 3 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the proceeding was recessed.)


TESTIMONY OF JOHN EDWARD PIC RESUMED

The proceeding was reconvened at 3:25 p.m.

Mr. JENNER. All right, Sergeant.

Do you recall along about this time that you were in the Bethlehem
Orphanage your mother became acquainted with a man by the name of E. A.
Ekdahl and subsequently married?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And it was about this time, around 1944, that you boys were
withdrawn from the Bethlehem Orphanage and taken to Texas?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Now, I will go back a little bit because I want you to put
it in sequence. Before we adjourned for noon recess, I covered the
matter of the period of the birth of Lee, the death of your stepfather
Lee Oswald, and then brought you up to the Bethlehem School and stopped
there.

To the extent you have impressions commencing with, let us say, your
entry into grammar school, at that time your stepfather Lee Oswald was
alive.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You were, when you entered grammar school that was
kindergarten you were only four and half years old.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall moving from place to place before you finally
settled in----

Mr. PIC. I just remember one residence prior to Alvez and Galvez.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. Where that would have been, I don't remember.

Mr. JENNER. OK. But you sort of settled down in 2109 Alvar?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That your stepfather had purchased that home in 1938?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And then you went along, he died about a year and a half
later after he purchased it.

Take us from the time that your stepfather died and tell us your
impressions of how the home life changed; if it did change, what
effect, if any, you observed that you now can recall that circumstances
had on your mother; and what kind of life you and the boys began to
lead as distinguished from the life you led while your stepfather was
alive if there is any change now.

I don't want to put any words in your mouth.

Mr. PIC. Well, we were from the time of his death, placed in two
boarding schools prior to Bethlehem, this Infant Jesus, and the other
one I don't recall the name of, the other one being a day school.

Mr. JENNER. Sort of a day school, your mother took you in the morning
and brought you back. That is two of the boys, not Lee?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He was almost a suckling child?

Mr. PIC. I don't remember. I don't see how he could have been there.

Now this day school was prior to Infant Jesus, it had to be. We went
to Infant Jesus and out of there back home for a year or so where we
attended Washington and then into Bethlehem.

Like I said before, we were constantly reminded we were orphans and had
financial difficulty.

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, sir; when you just talked about Washington and
Bethlehem you put Washington before Bethlehem, and this morning you put
Washington into Bethlehem.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; we went to Washington before Bethlehem.

Mr. JENNER. I think you will find that the record of this morning, I am
pretty sure, will show a different sequence. That is your impression,
that you went into Bethlehem a few months after your stepfather died?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; Infant Jesus.

Mr. JENNER. Infant Jesus. I see. Go ahead. You are right.

Mr. PIC. We were constantly reminded we were orphans and there were
financial difficulties, and I was rather young, I don't remember
too much about this, but it was always something to do about money
problems. We kind of liked Infant Jesus, it wasn't bad at all. We had a
pretty good childhood while we lived on Bartholomew Street, there were
no major problems there. And even at Bethlehem we both, Robert and I
enjoyed Bethlehem. I mean we were all there with the kids with the same
problems, same age groups, and everything. Things for myself became
worse when Lee came there, that is why I know he wasn't there too long.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us about it?

Mr. PIC. At Bethlehem they had a ruling that if you had a younger
brother or sister there they had bowel movements in their pants the
older brothers would clean them up, and they would yank me out of
classes in school to go do this and, of course, this peeved me very
much, and I wasn't but 10 or 9 or 11.

Mr. JENNER. He was only 3 years old?

Mr. PIC. Yes; but I was 10. And they did quite a few things like this.
If there was an older brother or sister there they had to take care of
the younger child. The people there didn't all the time.

Mr. JENNER. Was this 7-year spread as the years went on between you and
Lee, did that affect your relationship with him as distinguished from
your relationship with your brother Robert who was only 2 years younger?

Mr. PIC. Well, anything I was involved in Robert always was. Lee was
left out because of the age difference. Robert and I went to all these
homes together and all the schools together. Lee didn't, of course.

Mr. JENNER. During the course of the years your companions and friends,
I assume were different, that is you and Robert on the one hand?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And Lee on the other?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. His life differed a little from yours too, didn't it, that
is at the outset of this early period your mother, except for this
period at Bethlehem, when he was there, except for his being withdrawn
for a few weeks at a time, he was largely with her?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Living with her?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And did she express problems on her part with him?

Mr. PIC. Well, she referred how would she work and take care of a child
and things like this, both. It would seem that the problem with Robert
and I was easier to solve than the problem with Lee.

Mr. JENNER. I interrupted you. Go ahead with your account.

Mr. PIC. Well, up until we left Bethlehem, I can only recall three
places of employment for Mrs. Oswald, one being Oswald's notion store
which was 1941-42, thereabouts.

Mr. JENNER. While you had the Bethlehem house?

Mr. PIC. No; that was before Bethlehem.

Mr. JENNER. I don't mean Bethlehem, Bartholomew Street?

Mr. PIC. Yes; after we were placed in Bethlehem she was a manager of
Princess Hosiery on Canal Street and Pittsburgh Plate and Glass Co., I
don't remember which one came first.

Mr. JENNER. Myrtle Evans referred to Pittsburgh Plate and Lillian
Murret referred to Pittsburgh Plate. You do recall that?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; in fact, I think at the time she worked at
Pittsburgh Plate she was going with Mr. Ekdahl. In fact, I think I
remember him driving us over there or something once.

Mr. JENNER. When you were at Bethlehem, did your Aunt Lillian ever have
occasion to visit?

Mr. PIC. She never visited us that I recall. We visited her many times.

Mr. JENNER. While you were at Bethlehem?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall Myrtle Evans visiting on any occasion?

Mr. PIC. I don't remember. Wait a minute. Myrtle Evans, is she kind of
heavy?

Mr. JENNER. She is now.

Mr. PIC. She was then too, that is the same one.

Mr. JENNER. Energetic?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I remember a Myrtle.

Mr. JENNER. She had taken some accounting and----

Mr. PIC. The name is familiar, sir. I can't place the lady.

Mr. JENNER. She had been a girl friend of your mother's?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I wouldn't speculate whether she visited us or not at
Bethlehem, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you remember the Evanses coming over to see you when you
were at Covington, one time?

Mr. PIC. I don't recollect, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recollect Myrtle Evans coming and visiting when you
first went to Texas?

Mr. PIC. Sir; I don't remember Myrtle Evans that much. The name Myrtle
is familiar to me. Just like this woman that worked at Holmes for 30
years is familiar to me. Where I had seen her and different places?

Mr. JENNER. H-o-l-m-e-s?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this is a department store in New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. Of course you would recall the Murret family.

Mr. PIC. Yes; I recall them very good.

Mr. JENNER. There were a couple of those children about your age and
Robert's, is that right?

Mr. PIC. I can only--let's see, Charles, there is Marilyn and Charles.

Mr. JENNER. Marilyn is the youngest?

Mr. PIC. Marilyn is the youngest, no, sir; Boogie is the youngest.

Mr. JENNER. B-o-o-g-i-e?

Mr. PIC. What is he doing now. I heard he was playing semipro ball.

Mr. JENNER. No. He is not doing that any more. Is Boogie John?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I think----

Mr. JENNER. One is a dentist, one is with Squibb, Gene is a seminarian.

Mr. PIC. Gene is the priest. Gene is the one who is my age or
thereabouts. Boogie was closer to Robert's age.

Mr. JENNER. She had five children?

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. Marilyn.

Mr. PIC. Joyce.

Mr. JENNER. Marilyn, Joyce, John, Gene----

Mr. PIC. Charles.

Mr. JENNER. And Charles. They are all alive?

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. That was a fairly lively family, apparently all nice people.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; we enjoyed going there very much.

Mr. JENNER. How did Lee get along with them?

Mr. PIC. Well, I don't know how he got along with them. I know he was
placed there several times to stay for a while. I don't know if the
people resented this or was glad to have him or not.

Mr. JENNER. Well, they were glad to have him. They appeared to me to be
generous people.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. We always could count on our uncle for a dollar or
two.

Mr. JENNER. Yes. I take it from the questions I asked you this morning
that you had little or no contact with your stepfather's family, with
the Oswald family?

Mr. PIC. There was no contact that I remember at all, sir, after his
death. Prior to his death, there was quite a bit of contact from what
I remember. I remember maybe it was his mother, grandmother we would
visit. He had this other Oswald who was either a brother or sister
or something, we visited these people. I remember the older woman we
visited always gave us kids, including me, it was just Robert and I, a
whole bunch of toys for Christmas every Christmas. But after his death,
there was no contact at all, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What is your impression as to why that took place?

Mr. PIC. I will speculate and say that----

Mr. JENNER. Give me the impression you have rather than speculate.

Mr. PIC. They couldn't get along with Mrs. Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. With your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall an incident, sergeant, when your mother went
to work in 1942, and she had a couple, a Mr. and Mrs. Roach taking care
of Lee who was then----

Mr. PIC. What was Roach's first name, sir?

Mr. JENNER. Thomas.

Mr. PIC. What street did he live on?

Mr. JENNER. 831 Pauline.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I don't. The only one I could think of that may have
taken care of Lee was this milkman Bud and his wife.

Mr. JENNER. To help refresh your recollection, it is a fact that your
mother lived with Lee at 831 Pauline Street in 1942, and a couple
present there by the name of Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Roach, Thomas and Dora
Roach. They had been living on de Lessups Street in New Orleans, in the
800 block.

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And moved into 831 Pauline, or your mother moved into 831
Pauline Street with them. There was a whole question as to who was the
renter, whether it was the Roaches or your mother?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; this I don't recall at all.

Mr. JENNER. And it wasn't long after they were there that some
difficulty arose with respect to Lee and that ended that. It was about
6 weeks or a month, 2 months. But you have no recollection of that?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. The question I asked you and which I keep
interrupting in was to give me your impressions of change, if any, with
the coming of the death of your stepfather, and you were in the course
of recounting that.

Mr. PIC. Well, it struck me or it strikes me that we became lower and
lower in the class structure.

Mr. JENNER. As your financial status----

Mr. PIC. And our class structure, both.

Mr. JENNER. Would you elaborate on that? Your financial status went
down?

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. And then you say lower in the class structure?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Tell me about that?

Mr. PIC. I would say we were in the middle classes while we lived on
Alvez.

Mr. JENNER. While your father was alive?

Mr. PIC. And, being we moved to Bartholomew, and being in orphan homes,
I think we went to the upper lower class, one class structure dropped,
two class structures dropped, something like that.

Mr. JENNER. Were you conscious of that even as a 10-year-old?

Mr. PIC. Well, I realized that we weren't living as good as we used to,
sir.

Mr. JENNER. Go ahead.

Mr. PIC. Well, once we were placed in an orphan home, and we were with
our own kind, so to speak. I had no feelings whatsoever. I mean, we
enjoyed that place. They were rather strict but we enjoyed it. We had
quite a bit of freedom even though they were strict. We would sneak out
of the place at night and do all kinds of childish things. But Robert
and I enjoyed it.

Mr. JENNER. I am thinking more of your relations with your mother. Was
her personality affected by the death of your stepfather?

Mr. PIC. Probably she confided and put to me most of her problems since
she didn't have a husband to do this with, always referring to me as
the oldest and things like this. When we were in Bethlehem we didn't
see that much of her.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. Maybe once every 2 weeks, that would be the most often. Maybe
once in a while she would drop around.

Mr. JENNER. While you were at Bethlehem did you visit the Murrets?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; several times, lots of times. You see the home once
or twice a year, would take us to the city park there in New Orleans.
We would get on the rides and naturally the Murrets were right there,
and so we would rent bikes for free. It was on the home and I would
ride over to their house and visit with them a while, so did Robert.
Whenever we had a chance we were more than glad to go there.

Mr. JENNER. While at least through the Bethlehem Orphanage period your
present recollection is you accommodated to circumstances and within
the limits of the circumstances your impression is that you lived a
reasonably happy life?

Mr. PIC. We enjoyed it.

Mr. JENNER. Like all children you accommodated yourself to the
circumstances?

Mr. PIC. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Well, I think probably a good new start off point is Mr.
Ekdahl. Tell us your recollection of him, what led up, your present
recollection of the circumstances which brought him into your lives and
when you first were aware of his existence and what your circumstance
was at that time, what your mother's was?

Mr. PIC. Okay.

Mr. JENNER. Give times as best you can.

Mr. PIC. If you can date for me when I had my appendix out I can
practically date for you Mr. Ekdahl's----

Mr. JENNER. I am afraid I can't. Were you at Bethlehem Orphanage?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I was at Bethlehem so it would be either 1943 or 1944,
and I am sure she was at Pittsburgh at that time.

Mr. JENNER. Pittsburgh Plate?

Mr. PIC. Right. And it was right after I had my appendix out that he
appeared on the scene. And she visited us more often when she was
going with him.

Mr. JENNER. And she brought him with her, did she?

Mr. PIC. Yes; he had the car.

Mr. JENNER. By the way, did your mother have an automobile during this
period following your stepfather's death?

Mr. PIC. I don't think so, sir.

Mr. JENNER. But Mr. Ekdahl did have an automobile?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; he had a 1938 Buick.

Mr. JENNER. And your mother visited you more often?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. And they on weekends took us to Covington. I remember once, it
may have been more.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I wanted to ask you about that. While your
stepfather was still alive, did you occasionally visit Covington?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; we did.

Mr. JENNER. Covington, as I understand it, Covington, La., is sort of a
summer resort area, is it not?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; it is on the--it is north of New Orleans on the
northern shore of Lake Pontchartrain, and the Murrets used to go
to Mandeville, which is about 30 miles closer to New Orleans than
Covington was, and we used to visit them back and forth during the
summer.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the names of any of those people that
you--whose homes you, the summer resort homes that you rented during
the summer period?

Mr. PIC. To the best of my recollection, sir, we were in cabins at
these tourist places. We were never at anybody's home. The Murrets
were, I believe, at somebody's home in Mandeville. They had a large
house there.

Mr. JENNER. Does Mrs. Benny C-o-m-m-a-n-c-e, is that name familiar to
you?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. At 600 West 24th Street, Covington, familiar to you?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Does the address 311 Vermont stimulate your recollection
over in Covington?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; if it was this time period it doesn't. That may have
been the street we lived on when we went there in 1946, I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I ask you to relate the circumstances respecting
Mr. Ekdahl.

Mr. PIC. Well, in June 1944, we were removed from Bethlehem, and----

Mr. JENNER. Did you know about that in advance? Were you aware you were
going to be removed and why?

Mr. PIC. I don't remember how much in advance we knew this. We knew
maybe a couple of weeks ahead of time.

Mr. JENNER. Or maybe the more important thing is why were you being
removed from Bethlehem? What were the circumstances of bringing that
about?

Mr. PIC. Well, she was marrying Mr. Ekdahl, and if you had two parents
they wouldn't allow you to stay at Bethlehem.

Mr. JENNER. She was not yet married to him?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Didn't marry him until the 5th of March 1945?

Mr. PIC. That is about right, sir.

Mr. JENNER. So you were removed in June or May 1944, and the record
shows in June. Describe Mr. Ekdahl, please, to the extent you now have
a recollection?

Mr. PIC. He was----

Mr. JENNER. Who was he? Who did you understand he was?

Mr. PIC. He was an electrical engineer. His home was in Boston, Mass.,
somewhere around there. He was described to us as a Yankee, of course.
Rather tall, I think he was over 6 feet. He had white hair, wore
glasses, very nice man.

Mr. JENNER. Very nice man. I take it he was older than your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; he appeared to be somewhat older, quite a bit.

Mr. JENNER. A man of at least, apparently of considerably better means
than your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Than you boys had been accustomed to?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What about his health, what did you understand as to that?

Mr. PIC. I have no recollection of knowing anything about his health at
that time, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I see. When you were taken from Bethlehem Orphanage in June
of 1944, where did you go?

Mr. PIC. Dallas, Tex., sir.

Mr. JENNER. And do you recall where you lived in Dallas, Tex.?

Mr. PIC. I remember what the house looks like, sir. I don't remember
the address. You can probably refresh me on that.

Mr. JENNER. I will do so and I want to make it accurate. 4801 Victor
was the address.

Mr. PIC. That sounds familiar.

Mr. JENNER. In Dallas. Would you please describe that 4801 Victor
Street home?

Mr. PIC. It was white, two story.

Mr. JENNER. Frame, brick?

Mr. PIC. Frame. I think it contained four apartments, maybe only two. I
am pretty sure it was four though, two up and two down. We lived on the
lower right, in boxcar-type rooms.

Mr. JENNER. What do you mean by that?

Mr. PIC. Well, railroad style, living room, bedroom, bathroom, bedroom,
kitchen.

Mr. JENNER. One lined the other, you mean?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I see. With a long hallway to connect it; is that it?

Mr. PIC. The hall ran into each room as you walked by it.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; you lived there with your mother, with Lee, and with
Robert?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. At the outset?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Mr. Ekdahl did not live with you when you first went to
Dallas, Tex.?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection where he lived? First, was he
in Dallas?

Mr. PIC. I think he was in Fort Worth, sir. And he used to come over to
Dallas to see us. Is that right?

Mr. JENNER. I think that is right. I can't answer.

Mr. PIC. Okay.

Mr. JENNER. That was one of the reasons why I asked my first question.

Mr. PIC. I think that is the way the setup was, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I think that is so but I don't know. He would come over
from Fort Worth and visit you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You boys, when you reached Dallas in 1944, you entered
school, grammar school at that time, did you?

Mr. PIC. Robert--just a moment, sir; I remember I attended a summer
school session of the 6th grade. Robert may have. I don't really
remember. I think he did.

Mr. JENNER. We are in the summer of 1944?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; we went to summer school. I did, I know. I think he
may have.

Mr. JENNER. Do you remember that it was the Davy Crockett----

Mr. PIC. No, sir; it was not the Davy Crockett. It was another school.
Davy Crockett is where we entered in September. We meanwhile went to
summer school.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. If you can give me a map of Dallas?

Mr. JENNER. You never heard of it?

Mr. PIC. Give me a map of Texas and I can show you where approximately
the school was and I will show you where it was.

Mr. JENNER. You did, after that summer school period in the summer of
1944, enter grammar school in Dallas?

Mr. PIC. That is right. Davy Crockett Elementary School. I entered the
7th grade and Robert entered the 5th.

Mr. JENNER. Let's see, Lee is now almost 5 years old. Did he enter Davy
Crockett at that time?

Mr. PIC. To the best of my recollection, no, sir.

Mr. JENNER. At that age he would be going to kindergarten anyhow. All
right, you and Robert then entered Davy Crockett?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You continued on at Davy Crockett in the fall semester?

Mr. PIC. Just a moment.

Mr. JENNER. Yes?

Mr. PIC. This house we went to in Dallas.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. My mother owned it and rented the rest of it or she owned one
side of it.

Mr. JENNER. It was a duplex?

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. Myrtle Evans testified that she recalled visiting you,
the family, on a trip she made to Dallas on one occasion, on a buying
trip or something or accompanied a friend of hers, it was on a ladies'
apparel buying trip and she remembered it as what she called them,
two-place houses. To me they are duplexes.

Mr. PIC. Right; duplex.

Mr. JENNER. So her recollection is fairly good then. Does that affect
your recollection that it was a four-apartment building rather than it
was a two-apartment building?

Mr. PIC. I am pretty sure it was four apartments.

Mr. JENNER. Okay; go ahead.

Mr. PIC. Well, I was under the impression and always have been that she
owned the house, and there was some arrangement with Mr. Ekdahl as to
how she got it or something. She was renting to one couple upstairs, I
know; is this right?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. We are in Davy Crockett Elementary School, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Carry on.

Mr. PIC. Well, that would be September 1944. In the summer of 1945 she
married Mr. Ekdahl. I think you dated that as March or April.

Mr. JENNER. She married him, in fact, on May 7, 1945. I said March
before; I misspoke. It was May 7, 1945.

Mr. PIC. I have got summer. It is pretty good.

Mr. JENNER. Did he then move into the 4801 Victor Place?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; she took a short honeymoon for a day or two and came
back and moved in.

Mr. JENNER. In the summer of 1945 did you and Robert continue on
at--through that summer in Dallas?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That following September, however, you transferred to some
other school; did you not?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; and we were aware of this school before the school
session ended in 1945. I knew before we left Davy Crockett we were
going.

Mr. JENNER. What was the name of that?

Mr. PIC. In September 1945, sir, Robert and I entered Chamberlain-Hunt
Academy, military school for boys, Port Gibson, Miss.

Mr. JENNER. And you were aware of that--that that was forthcoming?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; as early as May 1945 I think.

Mr. JENNER. And what were the circumstances?

Mr. PIC. Mr. Ekdahl had to travel and so we were going to boarding
school.

Mr. JENNER. I exhibited to you earlier, and you identified a letter of
your mother's dated February 1, 1945, to the Bethlehem Orphanage, John
Pic Exhibit No. 4 in which your mother is petitioning the Bethlehem
Orphanage for the return of you two boys to the orphanage.

Mr. PIC. I don't think I was aware of this letter.

Mr. JENNER. You were not aware?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. So circumstances that you can recall now of the possible
relationship between your mother and Ekdahl that might have led to her
seeking to do this?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. She says in her letter she is thinking in terms of
returning you to Bethlehem because she is going to be traveling with
her husband when she does marry him--that is Mr. Ekdahl. There was no
discussion in your presence that you can recall on that subject?

Mr. PIC. Not returning to Bethlehem, no, sir; not that I remember. I
have to find Victor Street and from there I can just about guess where
the school was. I am lost on this map. I can't find Victor Street and
where I lived.

Mr. JENNER. Was Davy Crockett Grammar School near your home at 4801
Victor Street?

Mr. PIC. About three blocks, sir. Three long blocks.

Mr. JENNER. Describe that neighborhood to us.

Mr. PIC. I think it would be middle class.

Mr. JENNER. A level up from what you had been accustomed back in New
Orleans?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. There were fine brick homes; in fact, I had a paper
route out there that I delivered, and easily middle class. Maybe some
upper middle class.

Mr. JENNER. Was your life there pleasant?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And when Mr. Ekdahl moved in were the relationships
generally among all, now five of you, pleasant?

Mr. PIC. Between Mr. Ekdahl and the three boys they were pleasant, sir.
I think there were some arguments between Mr. Ekdahl and my mother from
time to time.

Mr. JENNER. You were aware of those?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. I am going to need a map with a listing of the
schools. This one doesn't seem to have one. This summer school was
about a good 2 miles away. We walked it in the morning.

Mr. JENNER. You and Robert?

Mr. PIC. I think me and Robert. We had other friends that we went to
school with.

Mr. JENNER. Of course.

Mr. PIC. And there were always a group of us. I don't remember if
Robert went or not, sir, to tell you the truth.

Mr. JENNER. I see. When you came around to the fall of 1945, however,
you entered the Chamberlain-Hunt Military Academy?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; in fact, the trip to Chamberlain-Hunt was a side
trip because Mr. Ekdahl, my mother, and Lee were on their way to Boston
to visit his folks. And so they dropped us off at the school and then
proceeded to Boston.

Mr. JENNER. Was that a motor trip?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; it was in a 1938 Buick.

Mr. JENNER. You remained at Chamberlain-Hunt Military Academy except
for summer vacation, or something of that nature, for how long?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir, you just want a blanket statement. I have got a
whole bunch of goodies while I was at Chamberlain-Hunt.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Go ahead.

Mr. PIC. During Christmas vacation of 1945 Robert and I received money
to go home for the Christmas holidays. We were to take the train from
Vicksburg, Miss., to Shreveport, La. These were instructions and when
we arrived at Shreveport, we were to wait for Mr. Ekdahl to pick us
up. We arrived and he wasn't there. So I think we waited around, I have
an estimate of between 1 and 2 hours, and then he showed up. He then
drove us to Fort Worth, Benbrook, Tex., and we had a house about 15
miles below Fort Worth in Benbrook, it was way out. It wasn't the same
Benbrook house, it was further. This was a brick house.

Mr. JENNER. The first house in Benbrook?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Had you known the family had moved to Benbrook, Tex.?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; because we was writing.

Mr. JENNER. Because of correspondence?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. This was your first view of that house?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us what it was; describe it to us?

Mr. PIC. It was rather isolated on one of the main highways. In fact, I
just drove that way recently and I couldn't find the place. When I went
up to Fort Worth in 1962 I was looking for the house, I couldn't find
it.

Mr. JENNER. Was it Granbury Road, Box 567, Benbrook, Tex.?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that sounds familiar. This was a brick house, with
quite a bit of ground. I think way back they told us that one of the
Roosevelt sons had a house out there, that is how I remember. We
arrived there sometime the next day or two; my mother quizzed us on why
we were so late. One reason we were late besides the wait was the heavy
fog, and I informed her we had to wait a while for Mr. Ekdahl, and she
kind of hinted to me, I think I was 15 at the time, did I see another
woman or was there anything shady about it or something. That is all I
have to say about that. She was under the impression years later, she
told me that he had met some woman in Shreveport and they were having
some fun.

Mr. JENNER. You were in Benbrook, Tex., then for the Christmas holiday?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You and Robert?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Lee was living with Mr. Ekdahl and your mother at the
Benbrook, Tex., home out on the outskirts of Fort Worth; I guess this
is----

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that is correct.

Mr. JENNER. And you returned after the Christmas holiday to----

Mr. PIC. It would be January 1946 we returned to, back to
Chamberlain-Hunt.

Mr. JENNER. Did you return home at all from then on until the summer of
1946?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Where were you during the summer of 1946?

Mr. PIC. In the summer of 1946, Robert and I were informed that we
would stay at the academy to attend summer session there. Well, school
let out in May and I think summer session starts in June, so there was
a waiting period of about 2 to 3 weeks, so we just stayed there. This
suited us fine. We really liked the school.

Sometime during that waiting period my mother showed up and informed us
that her and Mr. Ekdahl had separated, and she showed up with Lee, of
course, and she was going to take us to Covington where we would stay
the summer. We had--the commandant of the school was an attorney, and I
think she got some legal assistance from him about divorce proceeding
or something. She talked to him about it, I know. His name was Farrell,
Herbert D. Farrell. He was commandant of the school. Did you ever talk
to him?

Mr. JENNER. Not that I know of.

Mr. PIC. A real nice man, too. She had the car.

Mr. JENNER. The 1938 Buick?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. She had it.

Mr. JENNER. Had she taken a home or a house in Covington?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. When we arrived there she looked for a house, and
there always is one neighborhood two or three blocks from the downtown
area that we stayed in during the summers and she took a house in this
area. That address I don't remember.

Mr. JENNER. Does the address, the street Vermont Street refresh your
recollection, 311 Vermont?

Mr. PIC. The only thing I remember about the house is a lady next door
was plagued by squirrels throwing nuts on her roof because she was out
every morning chasing them with a broom.

Mr. JENNER. The squirrels?

Mr. PIC. The squirrels. This was a one-story brick house, and we lived
on the right side.

Mr. JENNER. You stayed there throughout the summer?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you return to Chamberlain-Hunt that fall?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; we returned to Chamberlain-Hunt in September 1946.
Then for the Christmas holidays, 1946, 1947, we returned to Covington
where she and Lee still were, and spent those holidays there. During
those holidays we made one trip to New Orleans with this other boy who
lived in Covington also that we went to school with, and they were
driving to New Orleans so we all bummed a ride and went to New Orleans
and visited the Murrets a day or so. I think it was 1 day.

Mr. JENNER. Did your mother accompany you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Had Lee entered grammar school at this time?

Mr. PIC. I wouldn't know, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Our records show that he entered----

Mr. PIC. He probably did.

Mr. JENNER. He entered in September 19, 1946, and continued to January
23, 1947, old Covington Grammar School.

Mr. PIC. Probably.

Mr. JENNER. Is that your impression at the time that he was in school,
he is now 7 years old?

Mr. PIC. I think he had to be in school or they came and got him. My
next note says that sometime between January 1947 until May 1947 Mr.
Ekdahl and my mother were reunited. Robert and I----

Mr. JENNER. Had she returned to----

Mr. PIC. To Fort Worth. She didn't return to Fort Worth. They moved
to Fort Worth. We had never been to Fort Worth before that except in
Benbrook.

Mr. JENNER. I see. This was from Benbrook, Tex., to Fort Worth?

Mr. PIC. Right. This address I don't remember, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Does the address 1505 Eighth Avenue, Fort Worth, refresh
your recollection?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that is it.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Go ahead.

Mr. PIC. OK. During that summer her and Mr. Ekdahl had their ins and
outs.

Mr. JENNER. You were home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I was assistant manager of an ice cream parlor. Now
let's go back further than that. When we first got there I got a job
for the summer at Walgreen's, and I worked there for a couple of weeks
before they fired me.

Mr. JENNER. You are now 15 years old?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. And while I was working there I met this other
boy, his name was Sammy, his last name I don't remember, he was from
California. He was working in Walgreen's in Fort Worth, also. So, after
I lost my job at Walgreen's I got this other job, assistant manager of
Tex-Gold Ice Cream Parlor which was on Eighth Avenue, about 6 blocks
from the house.

Mr. JENNER. Describe that house, please.

Mr. PIC. It was the second house from the corner. On the corner lived
the McLeans who was an attorney and I think he was her attorney or
his brother was her attorney in her divorce proceedings. They had a
couple of boys we became friendly with. The house itself was a brick, I
remember brick with a garage in the back. I think there was an upstairs
or side.

Mr. JENNER. Describe the neighborhood, please.

Mr. PIC. I would say it would be middle class.

Mr. JENNER. It was comparable to the neighborhood you lived in at 4801
Victor in Dallas?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. I was assistant manager of this Tex-Gold Ice Cream
Parlor.

Mr. JENNER. What was Robert doing?

Mr. PIC. Nothing.

Mr. JENNER. He didn't work?

Mr. PIC. I don't think so.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. That is right, he was playing around with girls at that time.

Like I said, my mother and Mr. Ekdahl were having problems. It would
seem they would have a fight about every other day and he would leave
and come back. Well, it seems one night, as I was returning from work,
I think we closed the store about 10 o'clock, Mr. Ekdahl and she drove
up and told me that they wouldn't be home that night, that they were
going downtown to the Worth Hotel. This was one of their reunions, and
this was one of their longer separation periods.

So, I went back and I told Lee and Robert, and this seemed to really
elate Lee, this made him really happy that they were getting back
together. Mr. Ekdahl, while Robert and I were at the academy would
write us, he was a great one for writing poetry. He would send us a
poem about ourselves or something, treated us real swell. Well----

Mr. JENNER. I--what is your impression of Mr. Ekdahl, did Lee like him?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is your definite impression that he liked him.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I think Lee found in him the father he never had. He
had treated him real good and I am sure that Lee felt the same way, I
know he did. He felt the same way about it, because Mr. Ekdahl treated
all of us like his own children.

Mr. JENNER. There appears to be in the file at Chamberlain-Hunt
Military Academy a letter from Mr. Ekdahl to your--to you boys dated
August 1946, carrying a return address of the Fayette Hotel on Third
Street of Fort Worth.

Mr. PIC. I don't know, sir.

Mr. JENNER. This would be at the time when your mother was living in
Covington. During that period.

Mr. PIC. I didn't know about it.

Mr. JENNER. You have no recollection of it?

Mr. PIC. I don't know where Mr. Ekdahl was when she was in Covington. I
know he was in the Fort Worth-Dallas area is all I knew.

Mr. JENNER. Your mother and Ekdahl, this incident you mentioned, you
mentioned that because it impressed you that they were getting back
together again, more friendly?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I mentioned it because it impressed Lee.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. I think it impressed him more than it did either of the older
boys.

Mr. JENNER. Did anything else occur during that summer?

Mr. PIC. A whole bunch of stuff.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Go ahead.

Mr. PIC. I think this is the same summer when we made the raid. I don't
know if you know about the raid or not.

Mr. JENNER. I don't think so.

Mr. PIC. Well, this guy Sammy that I knew had another--knew a couple,
a young married couple named Marvin and Goldie, I don't remember
their last names, sir, and Sammy and I were friends, Sammy lived in a
downtown hotel, and Marvin and Goldie had a house somewhere in the Fort
Worth area. So we became friendly the four of us, and then they would
come over to my house, and they got to know my mother and everything.
Well, after they broke up again, after this last incident.

Mr. JENNER. This is still during the summer of 1947?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this is still during the summer, my mother had
strong suspicions that Mr. Ekdahl was seeing another woman and she
was following him, I don't know how. I know she had the lead, she knew
where the woman lived and everything.

So, one night Marvin, Goldie, Sammy, my mother and I all piled into
this young couple's car, went over to these apartments, and Sammy acted
as a messenger, and knocked on the door and said, "Telegram" for this
woman, whoever she was. I don't remember the name. When she opened
the door, my mother pushed her way in, this woman was dressed in a
nightgown negligee, Mr. Ekdahl was seated in the living room in his
shirt sleeves and she made a big fuss about this. She's got him now and
all this stuff. That is about it. Well, that is all to that incident.

In September, Robert--well, in August--Robert and I in September
returned to Chamberlain-Hunt, this is September 1947. During the school
year 1947-48 I was informed about divorce proceedings. Christmas
holidays, 1947, Robert and I returned to the house on Eighth Avenue in
Fort Worth and those are the pictures of Lee sitting on the bike, it is
in that time period.

Mr. JENNER. Let's identify those. I hand you Pic Exhibit Nos. 52 and 53.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this was taken during that time period. This is the
front lawn of the house on Eighth Avenue and the white house in the
background would be that of the attorney Mr. McLean.

Mr. JENNER. Did you take those pictures?

Mr. PIC. Sir?

Mr. JENNER. Did you take the pictures?

Mr. PIC. My brother Robert and I each had a box camera we received--no,
we had the box camera before that. We took it with our box camera.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I offer those exhibits in evidence.

(John Pic Exhibits Nos. 52 and 53 were marked for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. Was Mr. Ekdahl living in the home at that time?

Mr. PIC. We did not see him during those holidays.

Mr. JENNER. You returned to the academy following the Christmas
vacation?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you continued on through the end of that school year,
did you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; to May 1948.

Mr. JENNER. Give me your impressions of Lee, he is now getting to
be 8 or 9 years old, his attitudes and course of conduct, and his
relationships with other children, either in the neighborhood or at
school.

Mr. PIC. Well, sir; when we were home, Robert and I, of course, that
was the only time we seen Lee, he would tag along with us to the movies
and everything. He did what we did, got in the same trouble we did and
so forth. I don't remember observing him with the other children. I had
my own problems at the age of 14. We did know that during the school
year of 1947-48, divorce proceedings were going to take place shortly.

We returned from Chamberlain-Hunt in May 1948, to a house I don't
remember the address of, sir, but we were back down in the lower class
again.

Mr. JENNER. The house at----

Mr. PIC. It was right slap next to the railroad tracks.

Mr. JENNER. 3300 Willing Street, Fort Worth.

Mr. PIC. If that is next to the railroad tracks, that is it. I remember
we had to listen to the trains going back and forth. She had moved in
this house a couple or 3 months prior to us returning from school.

Mr. JENNER. The divorce had taken place in the meantime?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; it had not.

Mr. JENNER. Was Mr. Ekdahl in this lower class house?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you see him during that summer?

Mr. PIC. No, sir--yes, sir. But not prior to May 1948. I seen him later
during the summer.

Mr. JENNER. Yes. You and Robert were home during that summer of 1948,
were you?

Mr. PIC. May I continue?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. When we returned home I seen this house and my first
impressions were that we are back to where we were. Lee had a dog that
a woman had given him, I think it is the same dog we have pictures
of, and I kind of had the feeling that our days at Chamberlain-Hunt
were ended even though it didn't come officially. Then sometime in the
summer of 1948, the divorce took place in Tarrant County, city of Fort
Worth. I had to testify. I think they attempted to put Lee on the stand
but he said that he wouldn't know right from wrong and the truth from a
falsehood so they excused him as a witness being he was under age.

I don't remember my testimony completely. I do remember that my mother
had made the statement that if Mr. Ekdahl ever hit her again that she
would send me in there to beat him up or, something which I doubt that
I could have done.

I was told by her that she was contesting the divorce so that he would
still support her. She lost, he won. The divorce was granted. I was
also told that there was a settlement of about $1,200 and she stated
that just about all of this went to the lawyer. Right after this is
when she purchased the house in Benbrook, Tex., the little house.

Mr. JENNER. Describe that house.

Mr. PIC. It was an L-shaped house, sir, being the top of the L was her
bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, and living room with a screened-in porch.
She and Lee slept together. My brother and I slept in the living room
in the screened-in porch on studio couches. When we moved into this
house and after the divorce and everything became final, I was----

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, was that 101 San Saba?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I don't know nothing about 101 San Saba.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the street you were on in Benbrook; this
first house?

Mr. PIC. There were no streets. We used a post office box number up at
the post office there. Because I was sending away for stamps at the
time from different companies, and I was collecting stamps and I would
go pick up the mail at the post office.

Mr. JENNER. The first house in Benbrook was on Granbury Road, that
is your recollection? That is the one you have already mentioned
heretofore?

Mr. PIC. Granbury Road is familiar, sir, if that is the one that is way
far south of town on Granbury Road, then that is it.

Mr. JENNER. Well, there is a letter in the file at the Hunt Military
Academy in October of 1945 informing them that a new address would be
Granbury Road, Route 5, Box 567 in Benbrook.

Mr. PIC. That is the one further south of Fort Worth.

Mr. JENNER. That is the first one?

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. The house you are now mentioning in Benbrook was the summer
of 1948 is different from the first one?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; it is.

Mr. JENNER. You can't remember the street address?

Mr. PIC. There was no street address. This was the first and only house
built there.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. They just built up this area and she got the very first house.
Two pictures there, Lee and Lee's dog and this is taken at the house in
Benbrook, that house.

Mr. JENNER. Would you select those, please?

Mr. PIC. These were taken in Covington.

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, the witness has referred to two pictures marked
John Pic Exhibits Nos. 50 and 51. Those were taken when?

Mr. PIC. It would be the summer of 1946 at Covington, La.

Mr. JENNER. And those pictures are pictures of whom?

Mr. PIC. Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. Holding a fish.

Mr. JENNER. I offer in evidence John Pic Exhibits Nos. 50 and 51.

(John Pic Exhibits Nos. 50 and 51 were marked for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. The witness has now handed me two pictures, Pic Exhibits
Nos. 54 and 55 one of which shows a young boy with a black-and-white
dog, and the other shows with a house in the background. The other
shows a house in the background and a black-and-white dog in front and
an automobile. Could you decipher, referring to the exhibit numbers,
the handwriting appearing at the top of each of those? You are looking
at Exhibit what now?

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 55, sir, shows Lee's dog and the family car.
This car belonged to us, that is why I brought it. The house in the
background was the one and only grocery store, groceteria, whatever you
want to call it, and laundromat in the area. This is where we did all
of our food buying.

Mr. JENNER. Shopping?

Mr. PIC. As far as the neighborhood was concerned.

Mr. JENNER. There is some writing at the top of the picture; what does
it say?

Mr. PIC. This says "Blackie, 1949."

Mr. JENNER. Blackie was the name of the dog?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Take that other exhibit and tell us what it was.

Mr. PIC. This was the same dog Lee had in 1948 when we returned from
the school. Exhibit No. 54 shows the same store in the background and
Lee Harvey Oswald, and a dog named Blackie. And to the right of the
picture is the roof and corner of the house.

Mr. JENNER. The house in which you lived?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I offer in evidence John Pic Exhibits Nos. 54 and 55.

(John Pic Exhibits Nos. 54 and 55 were marked for identification.)

Mr. PIC. After the divorce she bought the house in Benbrook, Tex., and
then she was either working at or just got the job at Leonard Bros.,
Fort Worth, department store, Fort Worth, Tex.

At this time Robert and I were informed that we would not return to
Chamberlain-Hunt in the fall. This, I think, was the first time that I
actually recall any hostility towards my mother.

Mr. JENNER. On your part?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this was quite a blow to me because we did want to
go back. I had 2 more years in high school and I was going to be in the
11th grade and I did want to finish there.

Mr. JENNER. How did Robert react to that?

Mr. PIC. He felt the same way, sir. He wanted to go back. But we were
informed because of the monetary situation it would be impossible for
us to go back. In fact, my mother informed me that the best thing for
me to do was not return to school but to get a job and help the family
supplement its income.

Mr. JENNER. That is withdraw from school entirely?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I was 16 at this time. In September, Lee and Robert
returned to school, and I went to work. I obtained a job at Everybody's
Department Store which belonged to Leonard Bros. I was a shoe stock boy
at the salary of $25 a week.

Mr. JENNER. Did you pay some of that money to your mother?

Mr. PIC. I think at least $15 out of every pay check I did.

Mr. JENNER. $15 a week?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I think my take-home pay was $22.50 after taxes.
Which left me $7.50 to ride back and forth on the bus with.

Mr. JENNER. Did you continue to live in this home in Benbrook?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; about the same time that I went to work and Lee and
Robert returned to school is when my mother bought the house at 7408
Ewing.

Mr. JENNER. In Fort Worth?

Mr. PIC. That is right, sir. It was just impossible for her and I to go
to work and leave them out in the sticks, but being we moved on Ewing
they could walk to school. In fact, I left for work earlier than she
did, a couple of hours, in fact.

Mr. JENNER. Had Lee attended school in Benbrook, Tex.?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; not in the little house because we moved in the
summer and moved out in the early fall.

Mr. JENNER. Had he attended a day school or a nursery school in
Benbrook, Tex., at anytime to your knowledge over this period of years?

Mr. PIC. During the summer, sir, my mother worked at Leonard Bros., the
three boys were left alone at home.

Mr. JENNER. What about the previous years?

Mr. PIC. She didn't work the previous years. She was still married to
Mr. Ekdahl.

Mr. JENNER. I appreciate that. I wonder if he went to nursery
school--when you first went to Benbrook, Tex., when you were on
Granbury Road?

Mr. PIC. I wouldn't know that, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You have no impression?

Mr. PIC. That I don't remember.

Mr. JENNER. All right. You now started to work in the fall of 1948.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The family moves into Fort Worth at 7408 Ewing Street.

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And Lee and Robert enter school in Fort Worth.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Is that correct? Do you remember the school, one would be a
grammar school and one a junior high school.

Mr. PIC. I think Robert went to Sterling Junior High School. In fact,
she would drive him there in the morning, and Lee was going to Ridglea,
West Ridglea Elementary School, something like that.

Mr. JENNER. What happened to Lee? You were working.

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. Robert was in school.

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. And Lee was in school.

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. Did Robert come home from school to take care of Lee when
he finished?

Mr. PIC. Lee returned home before Robert did, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What did he do?

Mr. PIC. I have no idea, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Your mother was at work?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He would just come home and wait until somebody came home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; there was no TV at that time so----

Mr. JENNER. Was he--what about his habits in that respect? Did--your
mother taught him to return home immediately and to stay in the house
until she arrived?

Mr. PIC. I am sure he always did, sir, knowing his personality. He was
not the type to goof off in things like this.

Mr. JENNER. Did you notice any tendencies on his part to do heavy
reading at this stage of his life?

Mr. PIC. He always read a lot, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He did?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What about his--was he gregarious or not? Did he exhibit
tendencies to be with other people and children in the neighborhood or
the contrary?

Mr. PIC. Not too much, sir. There weren't that many children his age
in the neighborhood. In fact, most of them were my age and my brother
Robert's.

Mr. JENNER. Did this age gap between you and Lee and between Lee and
your brother Robert affect your relationships with him now that you had
reached the age you were now 16, Robert was 14, and Lee was 9.

Mr. PIC. We played with Lee. Lee had his dog. On the weekends, Sunday,
we would all go to the movies, the whole family. I usually went to work
at sunup and returned at dark myself.

In the fall of 1948 it was the fad among high school students and young
teenagers to join either the National Guard or Naval Reserve or some
reserve outfit like this, so I was only 16 at the time, and I wanted
to do this, and my mother thought it would be a real good way to
supplement the income. So----

Mr. JENNER. Did you get paid for this service?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; we would meet once a month and draw a day's salary,
something like this. It wasn't much money, a couple or $3 a meeting;
something like that. So we went to the notary, I think, this was
McLean's office and she swore to a notary that I was 17.

Mr. JENNER. But you were not in fact 17?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I was 16. She gave my birthday as 17 January 1931.
Can we go off the record?

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. PIC. OK, so I joined the Marine Corps Reserve sometime in October
1948. I was attached to the 2d, 155th Military Howitzer Battalion,
U.S. Marine Corps Reserve, Fort Worth, Tex. About that time I started
thinking and decided regardless of how my mother felt what happened,
I was going to go back to school. So in January 1949 I went back to
school and finished my high school education.

Mr. JENNER. To what school did you return?

Mr. PIC. I attended Arlington Heights High School, sir.

Mr. JENNER. In Fort Worth?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you work after school? Did you do anything to
supplement your income?

Mr. PIC. I was able to retain my job at Everybody's as a stock boy for
about 1 month on this part-time basis but at the end of February they
informed me there was no way I could be kept on a part-time basis so
I left the job and I then got a job at Burt's shoestore. At Burt's
shoestore I was working part time but really making more than full time
because I was a stock boy at $15 and all the commissions I could make
in their stockroom plus all day Saturday.

Mr. JENNER. Selling shoes?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What was your mother doing at this time?

Mr. PIC. I believe at this time, sir, she was working at Sterling's
Department Store in Fort Worth after leaving Leonard Bros., before I
left Everybody's, I think.

Mr. JENNER. Was Robert working after school?

Mr. PIC. Yes; he was working at the A & P.

Mr. JENNER. Had he been working at the A & P after school from the
previous fall?

Mr. PIC. This would be 1949. February 1949, and I am sure he was
working at A & P and going to school at that time, some time during
that period. He and I were both working and going to school, both.

So, in January 1949, I returned to high school, Arlington Heights High
School, Fort Worth, Tex., and was a junior, 11th grade there.

The school session ended and then I attended summer school to make up
for what I had lost at Paschal High School, Fort Worth, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. P-a-s-k-a-l?

Mr. PIC. P-a-s-c-h-a-l, sir; is the way they spell it, sir. I still had
the job at Burt's. So I attended summer school at Paschal, the summer
of 1949. September of 1949----

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, what did Lee do now? Had he been in school in
the fall and winter of 1948 and the winter and spring of 1949?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, vacation is here. What did he do during the
summer? You went to school, and you worked at Burt's, what was he doing?

Mr. PIC. Playing around home. And going to this Camp Carter that we ran
across in the letter, I guess, I don't remember.

Mr. JENNER. What was Robert doing during the summer?

Mr. PIC. He was working at the A & P, sir; I believe.

Mr. JENNER. Were both of you boys contributing to the support of your
mother during this period?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Both of you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Were you continuing to give your mother the $15 a week you
had started to give her in the fall of 1948?

Mr. PIC. Well, as far as I am concerned, being that I had no set
income, I worked on a guaranteed salary of $15 plus commissions my pay
might fluctuate between $20, $35 a week depending on how good a week I
had. And I pro-rated this accordingly with her.

Mr. JENNER. And was Robert contributing something as well?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; he was.

Mr. JENNER. Lee didn't work at any time?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever recall Lee up through this time through the
summer of 1949 doing any work?

Mr. PIC. No.

Mr. JENNER. He is now 10 years old?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He didn't have any paper routes or do the things that a
10-year-old sometimes does?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. We have now reached the fall of 1949.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; September 1949, I decided--well, let's go back to
when I went back to high school.

Mr. JENNER. All right. It is January of 1949.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Lee was at Ridglea.

Mr. PIC. OK. I figured since I was smart enough to decide to go back
to high school and my mother tried to talk me out of it I felt it was
my own doing and therefore it was my own responsibility, so I decided
since that is the way she felt and that was the way I felt I would sign
my own report cards and take care of my own notes and everything.

My hostility towards her increased at this time because she pushed me
to work and make money, and I knew an education, as much as I could get
would be the best thing for me.

Since I took on the responsibility of going back to school I figured I
could take care of the rest of it and I wanted nothing from her in this
regard. This I did. I signed my own report card, wrote my own notes
when I played hooky and missed school.

Mr. JENNER. Signing her name?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; so in----

Mr. JENNER. By the way what kind of a student were you?

Mr. PIC. I was a pretty good student at Chamberlain-Hunt. I had an A-B
average at Chamberlain-Hunt, I believe, I did not do too good in the
public schools, it was a little bit different, in Chamberlain-Hunt. The
classes being a little larger, no individualized concern, just mass
teaching. This was a little hard for me to adjust to. I did, I think I
had a B or C average at Arlington Heights.

My summer school session, I think I maintained a B-C average. Maybe an
A in one subject. So that in the 1949, the summer of 1949, I went to
Paschal High School for the summer session, and I decided at this time
that I liked Paschal better than Arlington Heights, so I fixed up my
own transfer papers and I transferred to Paschal High School in the
fall of 1949, which I did enjoy the school better.

Arlington Heights was rather a snobbish school, the rich kids went
there and everything, and being I was enrolled in what was called
distributive education which means you go to school and work part time
you are kind of looked down upon in these type schools. But in Paschal
it wasn't that way. The kids weren't snobbish and they weren't so high
class, the majority of them.

I didn't do too good that particular year. I was working pretty hard,
and I think I flunked one subject. So right after the Christmas
holidays 1949, I was coming towards my 18th birthday and I decided I
had just about finished school and I would be graduated, if I passed
everything I would, and I decided to join the service, the Coast Guard,
and then I processed my paper work, and 3 days prior to graduation I
quit school and joined the Coast Guard.

At this time to get in the Coast Guard was rather hard to do. You had
to get on a waiting list and when they called you and you didn't show
up for it you didn't get in maybe for 6 months or so. I joined the
Coast Guard because it was the hardest service to get into. I wasn't
interested in the Army or the Marine Corps or the Navy. I took the one
that was hardest, the hardest requirement and I got into it.

So, in January, approximately 25 January 1950 I joined the Coast Guard,
and left for Cape May, N.J. I did not see Robert, Lee, or my mother
until October 1950, 9 months later.

Mr. JENNER. October of 1959?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; 1950. 1950.

Mr. JENNER. Before we get to that or probe that any further, Lee
returned to school in the fall of 1949?

Mr. PIC. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. He was still at Ridglea Elementary, then?

Mr. PIC. As far as I know, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What was his general attitude and his activities during
this period 1948, 1949, through the summer of 1949.

Mr. PIC. Sir; I was 17 years old, I wasn't interested in what an
8-9-year old kids activities were in school. I mean I had girls on my
mind and other things like that, you know.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. To be honest with you.

Mr. JENNER. Yes, of course. What was your impression of him at that
time?

Mr. PIC. He would get into his trouble, and maybe he would have
trouble with a neighbor now and then about walking across their lawn
or something. I remember once there was a fight on the bus because of
Lee that my brother Robert got beat up because. Robert probably would
remember that better than I did.

Mr. JENNER. I don't know whether he mentioned that.

Mr. PIC. I know he got his rear end whipped because of Lee.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

You entered the Coast Guard, and then you didn't see either of your
brothers or your mother from the time of your enlistment in January of
1950.

Mr. PIC. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. Until when?

Mr. PIC. October 1950, sir. Early October 1950.

Mr. JENNER. What was that occasion?

Mr. PIC. I went back home on leave, back to Fort Worth on leave, sir.

Mr. JENNER. How long were you home on leave?

Mr. PIC. I think I took 20 days' leave. I think I stayed there 15, 16,
something like that, about 2 weeks.

Mr. JENNER. What was the general atmosphere around the house at that
time?

Mr. PIC. Well, everybody was glad to see me. I was--well, I come home
with a couple of hundred dollars, you know a sailor off the high seas
always saves his money and the mother right away wanted to hold it for
me and so she conned me into that, and she let me have a few dollars of
my own.

Then I spent most of my time looking up old girl friends and things,
and visiting Mr. Conway. He and I were always playing chess together.

Mr. JENNER. Mr. Conway, I took his deposition.

Mr. PIC. Yes, very nice man.

Mr. JENNER. He spoke of playing chess with you a great deal.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I had forgotten that. Lived across the street.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; about five doors, four doors to the right of us.

Mr. JENNER. On the same side of the street?

Mr. PIC. Same side.

Mr. JENNER. Hiram Conway.

Mr. PIC. Hiram P. Conway.

Mr. JENNER. You then returned to the service?

Mr. PIC. Yes. I reported back to my ship.

Mr. JENNER. When next did you see your mother or Lee or Robert?

Mr. PIC. August 1952, sir.

Mr. JENNER. When you were back in the fall of 1950, was Lee in school?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; as far as I know.

Mr. JENNER. At Ridglea Elementary?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; as far as I know.

Mr. JENNER. Robert was still in school. He is now 16-1/2 years of age?

Mr. PIC. I don't know if he was. Going through those letters there was
a time period he was in school, out of school. I don't really remember.
I don't think he was in school when I returned on leave.

Mr. JENNER. What was he doing?

Mr. PIC. A & P, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Working. Are you now and were you then aware of the fact
that your father contributed to your support during all the years
actually until you reached your 18th birthday?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that is when I decided to make it all on my own
since she reminded me of the fact that she wouldn't get no money after
I was 18 so that was one thing that contributed to me deciding to leave.

Mr. JENNER. Were you aware during all these years of what the amount of
that contribution was?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I wasn't.

Mr. JENNER. But you were aware of the fact that your father was making
contributions?

Mr. PIC. I was always told it wasn't enough, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Apart from that you were aware of the fact your father was
making contributions?

Mr. PIC. Right. She reminded me the day I became 18 that the payments
stopped right then and there.

Mr. JENNER. The fact is that they did.

Mr. PIC. I know. I have no reason to doubt that. What was the amount?

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. JENNER. When you were in the service did you make any allotment to
your mother?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you send her any money at any time while you were in
the service?

Mr. PIC. Quite frequently, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that. Tell us as best you can the amount.

Mr. PIC. When I was in boot camp from January 1950 to May 1950, the
only amount they paid us was $15 every 2 weeks and they held back the
rest of our pay until we would graduate and then we would have money to
go to our next station with. They do this to recruits. I don't remember
if I sent any of this 15 or not, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you send any of the excess when you got it?

Mr. PIC. In those letters I presented you could add them up and see how
much I sent in the year 1950. I think I sent $10, $20 at a time when I
had it. I was making $80 a month. How much could I send and still be a
sailor?

Mr. JENNER. This is not in any sense a criticism, sergeant. All I am
doing is seeking some facts.

Mr. PIC. Well, sir, in the letters she refers to 10, 20, 40, sometimes.

Mr. JENNER. I show you John Pic Exhibits Nos. 48 and 59, and referring
to No. 48, at the bottom of which is written Lee, age 2-1/2. Would you
identify that, please?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this is Lee Harvey Oswald age 2-1/2 as the picture
states written in the handwriting of Mrs. Marguerite Oswald. This
picture was taken at Lillian Murret's at Sherwood Forest Drive.

Mr. JENNER. That was your aunt's home in Sherwood Forest, New Orleans.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I am sure of that.

Mr. JENNER. I show you John Pic Exhibit No. 49 which--would you
identify that?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this is a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald, I guess at
the same time, with a dog, and I am sure this was taken at Lillian
Murret's in Sherwood Forest Drive.

Mr. JENNER. At the same time that John Pic Exhibit No. 48 was taken?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I think so.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I hand you now John Pic Exhibit No. 56, a
photograph of a young man. Would you identify that as to time and place
if you can, and age, his age, the subject's age?

Mr. PIC. Sir, this is a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald which I believe to
have been taken when he was in about the second or third grade.

Mr. JENNER. That would be when you were living in Dallas?

Mr. PIC. Fort Worth, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Fort Worth, yes; 7408 Ewing.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I hand you John Pic Exhibits Nos. 57 and 58. I don't know
which depicts this young man at the younger age. Take the younger one.

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 57, sir, I believe was taken either in late
1951 or early 1952, and it shows a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald
approximately how he looked when he came to New York to stay with my
wife and I in August of 1952.

Exhibit No. 58, to my best recollection, I think, is a picture sent to
me by my mother in approximately 1954, 1955, maybe in 1956, from New
Orleans, La. It is a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. It is after they returned to New Orleans?

Mr. PIC. I am pretty sure that picture was taken in New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I offer in evidence John Pic Exhibits Nos. 48,
49, 56, 57, and 58.

(John Pic Exhibits Nos. 48, 49, 56, 57, and 58 were marked for
identification.)

Mr. JENNER. What were the circumstances surrounding and leading up to
your mother and Lee coming to New York City in the summer of 1952?

Mr. PIC. I think this was brought on because Robert joined the service
sometime previous to that. That would be about right, April 1952, did
he join the service. I don't know when. He wasn't there at the time. He
was in the service when they came.

Mr. JENNER. Yes. He entered the service as soon as he reached his
majority.

Mr. PIC. So that would be April 1952.

Mr. JENNER. Was there an incident respecting, between Robert and your
mother and some young lady in which, in whom he was interested just
before he entered the service?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You came to know about that?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By what means?

Mr. PIC. By way of my mother, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right, what was it?

Mr. PIC. Robert had been seeing this girl and she had a club foot. My
mother didn't feel that they should be married. He wanted to marry her,
and she conned him out of it.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Had you received any letters from Robert on that
subject at anytime?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Between the time you were home in October of 1950 and the
summer of 1952, had you seen your mother or either of your brothers?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, my question to you was what led up to and
what were the circumstances involving or surrounding the visit of your
mother and Lee to New York in the summer of 1952.

Mr. PIC. Well, Robert had joined the service in April 1952. It was the
summer months, so Lee was not in school, and the trip to New York was
feasible, being Lee would have no schooltime lost, it was my impression
and also my wife's--meanwhile, I was married, you know, if you are
interested in this.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; I am.

Mr. PIC. August 18, 1951, I married my wife Margaret Dorothy Fuhrman.

Mr. JENNER. You had met her after you had entered the service and while
you were stationed in the New York area?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. At this time, that is the summer of 1952 you were living
where?

Mr. PIC. 325 East 92d Street, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have any children at that time?

Mr. PIC. In August 1952; yes, sir. I did.

Mr. JENNER. Your first child was born?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; John Edward Pic, Jr.

Mr. JENNER. Was the child born before or after your mother and Lee
arrived.

Mr. PIC. Before, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. He was born 14 May 1952, approximately 3 months before they
arrived.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Did you invite your mother and Lee to come to
New York?

Mr. PIC. The impression that my wife and myself had was they
were coming to visit, sir, and we had nothing against this. My
mother-in-law, we lived with her at the time, she was visiting her
other daughter, Mrs. Emma Parrish, in Norfolk, Va., she was staying
with them, so we had the room for them.

Mr. JENNER. But that was your mother's apartment or home?

Mr. PIC. Mother-in-law's.

Mr. JENNER. Was it an apartment or a home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; it was a box, freight-car type railroad apartment.

Mr. JENNER. One room in back of the other?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. So you were then guests of your mother-in-law at that
particular time, that is, living in her home or apartment? And your
impression was that your mother and Lee they were just visiting for
the summer months or for a period, to visit for the summer months or a
period during the summer that was your definite impression.

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right, what happened?

Mr. PIC. At this time I was stationed at U.S. Coast Guard, Port
Security Unit, Ellis Island, New York. My status there, I was, I worked
once every fourth night, also every fourth weekend so I wasn't home all
the time. When they came I took leave so I could spend more time with
them.

Mr. JENNER. "I took Lee," would you elaborate on that? What do you mean
you took Lee.

Mr. PIC. I am allowed 30 days leave a year and I took off, I took a
week or so, I think.

Mr. JENNER. I misunderstood you, I thought you said you took Lee but
you said you took leave.

Mr. PIC. Leave.

Mr. JENNER. You took 30 days leave.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; maybe a week or two.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression, you were with them or tried to be
with them during that 2-week period.

Mr. PIC. Just a minute, sir. That is where I began my notes. August
1952, my mother and Lee came to New York. They brought with them quite
a bit of luggage, and their own TV set. On my way home I had to walk
about 8 to 10 blocks to the subway, and Lee walked up to meet me as I
was walking home, I told my wife and Lee decided to go up and meet me.
We met in the street and I was real glad to see him and he was real
glad to see me. We were real good friends. I think a matter of a few
days or so I took my leave. Lee and I visited some of the landmarks
of New York, the Museum of Natural History, Polk's Hobby Shop on 5th
Avenue. I took him on the Staten Island ferry, and several other
excursions we made.

Mr. JENNER. Go ahead.

Mr. PIC. Well, sir; it wasn't but a matter of days before I could sense
they moved in to stay for good, and this not being my apartment, but my
mother-in-law's apartment, my wife kind of frowned upon this a little
bit. We didn't really mind as long as my mother-in-law wasn't there,
but she was due back in a matter of a month or so.

During my leave I was under the impression that I may get out of the
service in January of 1953, when my enlistment was up, so I went around
to several colleges. My mother drove me to these colleges, Fordham
University, for one, and Brooklyn, some college in Brooklyn, a couple
of other ones I inquired about. I remember one conversation in the car
that she reminded me that even though Margy was my wife, she wasn't
quite as good as I was, and things like this. She didn't say too many
good things about my wife. Well, naturally, I resented this, because I
put my wife before my mother any day.

Things were pretty good during the time I was on leave. When I went
back to work I would come home my wife would tell me about some little
problem they would have. The first problem that I recollect was that
there was no support for the grocery bill whatsoever. I don't think I
was making more than $150 a month, and they were eating up quite a bit,
and I just casually mentioned that and my mother got very much upset
about it. So every night I got home and especially the nights I was
away and I would come home the next day my wife would have more to tell
me about the little arguments. It seems it is my wife's impression that
whenever there was an argument that my mother antagonized Lee towards
hostility against my wife.

My wife liked Lee. My wife and I had talked several times that it would
be nice if Lee would stay with us alone, and we wouldn't mind having
him. But we never bothered mentioning this because we knew it was an
impossibility.

It got toward schooltime and they had their foothold in the house and
he was going to enroll in the neighborhood school, and they planned to
stay with us, and I didn't much like this. We couldn't afford to have
them, and took him up to enroll in this school.

Mr. JENNER. You did?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; my mother did. I think this is a public school in New
York City located on about 89th, 90th Street between Third Avenue and
Second Avenue. Lee didn't like this school. I didn't much blame him.

Mr. ELY. When you visited these colleges, had you received credit for
finishing high school somehow?

Mr. PIC. No.

Mr. JENNER. Did you hear anything to the effect that the reason why
your mother and Lee had come to New York had anything to do with Lee's
being given some sort of mental tests?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was there a period of time just before the enrollment of
Lee in the New York Public School, that he attended for about a month a
Lutheran denominational school?

Mr. PIC. I don't know, sir. I am not up to that yet.

Mr. JENNER. I see. All right.

Mr. PIC. At about the same time that Lee was enrolled in school that
we had the big trouble. It seems that there was an argument about the
TV set one day, and--between my wife and my mother. It seems that
according to my wife's statement that my mother antagonized Lee, being
very hostile toward my wife and he pulled out a pocketknife and said
that if she made any attempt to do anything about it that he would use
it on her, at the same time Lee struck his mother. This perturbed my
wife to no end. So, I came home that night, and the facts were related
to me.

Mr. JENNER. When the facts were related to you was your mother present,
Lee present, your wife present? If not, who was present?

Mr. PIC. I think my wife told me this in private, sir. I went and asked
my mother about it.

Mr. JENNER. Your mother was home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; she was home.

Mr. JENNER. You went and spoke with your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was Lee present when you spoke to your mother?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What did you say to your mother and what did she say to you?

Mr. PIC. I asked her about the incident and she attempted to brush it
off as not being as serious as my wife put it. That Lee did not pull a
pocketknife on her. That they just had a little argument about what TV
channel they were going to watch. Being as prejudiced as I am I rather
believed my wife rather than my mother.

Mr. JENNER. Did you speak to Lee about the incident?

Mr. PIC. I am getting to that, sir. So I approached Lee on this
subject, and about the first couple of words out of my wife he became
real hostile toward me, and let me get my notes on it. When this
happened it perturbed my wife so much that she told them they are
going to leave whether they liked it or not, and I think Lee had the
hostility toward my wife right then and there, when they were getting
thrown out of the house as they put it.

When I attempted to talk to Lee about this, he ignored me, and I was
never able to get to the kid again after that. He didn't care to hear
anything I had to say to him. So in a matter of a few days they packed
up and left, sir. They moved to the Bronx somewhere.

Mr. JENNER. Did you see them from time to time thereafter?

Mr. PIC. Yes, I can continue if you wish. Unless you want to stop there
and ask me something about it.

Mr. JENNER. Well, at this point, yes, I would like to ask you this: You
hadn't seen them from October of 1950 until the summer of 1952. Did you
notice any change in him, his overall attitude, his relations with his
mother, his demeanor, his feelings towards others, his actions toward
others?

Mr. PIC. He was definitely the boss.

Mr. JENNER. Now, tell us on what you base that?

Mr. PIC. I mean if he decided to do something, regardless of what my
mother said, he did it. She had no authority whatsoever with him. He
had no respect for her at all. He and my wife got along very well
together when they were alone, when she wasn't present, she and Lee got
along very well. She always reminded me of this.

Mr. JENNER. Your wife reminded you of that?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. Without my mother present she could make it with Lee.

Mr. JENNER. But as soon as your mother came within contact with Lee in
your home, then the attitude changed?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Up to this incident when this knife pulling incident
occurred, how had your relations with Lee been?

Mr. PIC. Been very good, sir. He and I had gone on all these excursions
throughout New York City, and I tried to show him what I could, and
spend as much time as I could with him.

Mr. JENNER. You found him to have--he was interested in that sort of
thing?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; he loved to go to the Museum of Natural History,
anything like that he liked.

Mr. JENNER. Did you speak to him about this relationship he appeared to
have with his mother in which he minded her or not as he saw fit and
did as he wished?

Mr. PIC. Not until the knife pulling incident.

Mr. JENNER. And you did discuss that subject with him on that occasion?

Mr. PIC. I attempted to, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you attempt to do it thereafter when you saw him from
time to time?

Mr. PIC. Sir, he would have nothing to do with me thereafter.

Mr. JENNER. He would not.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he wouldn't even speak to me.

Mr. JENNER. There was an absolute, complete change then in his
relations with you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that is correct.

Mr. JENNER. It was a marked one?

Mr. PIC. That is correct. I have a couple of more incidents in which I
can relate that even more so.

Mr. JENNER. Would you do that?

Mr. PIC. Well, the day they moved out they had done this before I came
home from work.

Mr. JENNER. They had moved out before you came home from work?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir. To elaborate, in my notes I have "after
I approached Lee about this incident his feelings toward me became
hostile and thereafter remained indifferent to me and never again was I
able to communicate with him in any way."

Mr. JENNER. Sergeant, if you can, instead of just reading from your
notes, read your notes, and if they refresh your recollection and then
give in your own words the facts.

Mr. PIC. Well, prior to this particular incident, I would consider
us the best of friends as far as older brother-younger brother
relationship. My wife always says that he idolized me and thought quite
a bit of me.

Mr. JENNER. Up to this time, the relationship between you and your
brother Lee, and your brother Robert, all three of you, had been a
cordial normal friendly relationship that you expect to exist among
brothers?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What was your nickname?

Mr. PIC. Pic.

Mr. JENNER. What was your brother Robert's nickname?

Mr. PIC. In Chamberlain-Hunt we referred to him as "Mouse". I think
that hung on a while after that.

Mr. JENNER. What nickname did he have before that?

Mr. PIC. None that I recall.

Mr. JENNER. Why did he get that? Was he a quiet boy?

Mr. PIC. He was the littlest one in Chamberlain-Hunt and that was why
they called him that.

Mr. JENNER. I see, size.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did Lee ever have a nickname?

Mr. PIC. Not that I know of, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You had the feeling, did you, up until this incident at
least that Lee is a young boy, 7 years younger than you, and his
brother Robert 5 years older than he, and he looked up to both of you
as older brothers?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you had, both you and your brother Robert had love in
your heart for your brother Lee?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you felt he reciprocated that?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And the relationship between yourself and your brother
Robert was cordial?

Mr. PIC. They always have, and still are, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I may say to you that he so testified. All right.

Mr. PIC. So they moved out in about September 1952, maybe it was
late September, early October, somewhere around there, so from about
somewhere between September of 1952 and January 1953, my brother Robert
came to New York on leave, and we were all invited up to the Bronx.

Mr. JENNER. To visit whom?

Mr. PIC. Sir?

Mr. JENNER. To visit whom?

Mr. PIC. To visit my mother and my brother.

Mr. JENNER. Your brother?

Mr. PIC. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. Did your brother's wife accompany him?

Mr. PIC. He wasn't married at that time, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He wasn't married?

Mr. PIC. I think this was, his leave was probably in October or
November 1952, a matter of a month or two after they had moved out. We
visited their apartment in the Bronx.

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, where did your brother stay?

Mr. PIC. I think he stayed at the Soldier-Sailor-Airmen Club in New
York.

Mr. JENNER. In any event he did not stay with you.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he may have stayed with my mother also. I don't think
so. Maybe for a night or two. We went out, my wife fixed him up with a
date with one of her girl friends and we went out together a couple of
times. So, we were invited up there for this Sunday dinner. So it was
my mother, Lee, Robert, my wife, myself, and my son.

Robert was already there when we arrived. When Lee seen me or my wife
he left the room. For dinner he sat in the front room watching TV and
didn't join us whatsoever.

Mr. JENNER. He did not join you for dinner?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. Didn't speak to me or my wife.

Mr. JENNER. That put a kind of pall on the visit, did it not?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you--he didn't speak to you. Did you attempt to speak
with him?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. JENNER. Did he answer you?

Mr. PIC. He shrugged his shoulders a couple of times maybe. He wasn't
interested in anything I had to say.

Mr. JENNER. He was definitely hostile to you and to Mrs. Pic?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that continued throughout the entire visit that evening
or was it an evening?

Mr. PIC. It was early afternoon until dusk. We did have an infant son
we had to get home.

Mr. JENNER. Was it a Sunday or Saturday?

Mr. PIC. I am sure it was a Sunday. In January 1950----

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, what did you observe with respect to the
attitude of Lee toward his mother on that occasion?

Mr. PIC. When he was eating he came and got what he wanted, picked up
his plate, went to the living room and watched TV. He decided what he
wanted to eat and maybe she helped him. I don't really remember too
much about it. I know he did not eat with us.

Mr. JENNER. Did you notice his relation, if any, with Robert?

Mr. PIC. From what I was told later and so forth when I wasn't present
him and Robert got along real good.

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. My question was did you observe on this occasion.

Mr. PIC. There was nothing to observe while I was present, sir. He was
completely withdrawn from the crowd.

Mr. JENNER. He withdrew from everybody?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. Personally, I didn't know if he was more hostile towards me or
my wife. I still don't know this fact. Maybe it was her, maybe it was
me, maybe it was both of us.

In January 1953, I did reenlist in the Coast Guard. I decided to stay
in rather than quit, and so forth.

Mr. JENNER. From the time of that October visit of Robert to January
1953, did you see Lee at any time during that period?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I did not. I seen my mother on several occasions. She
was working on 42d Street in a Lerner's Dress Shop. I guess I would see
her maybe once every 3 weeks to once a month, we dropped downtown, my
wife and I, to see her.

Mr. JENNER. What did she say about Lee during that time when you saw
her on those occasions?

Mr. PIC. Whenever I seen her, whether I was alone or with my wife, I
was usually alone, I went to see her myself, my wife didn't care to see
my mother, she would complain about her financial status and when I
would ask her about how Lee was doing she would say, "OK" but would not
elaborate.

Said "He is OK, but he doesn't have a brother, an older brother to talk
to or no one to do anything with."

Mr. JENNER. During this period of time and up to January 1953, in any
of the contacts you had with your mother did you learn or were you
advised or did you become aware that there was difficulty with Lee with
respect to truancy in attendance at school?

Mr. PIC. I am not quite there, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. The answer is, I take it, that up to this point
of January 1953 you were not aware.

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Despite the fact that you had seen your mother from time to
time during that period?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right, we are at January 1953, when you reenlisted in
the Coast Guard.

Mr. PIC. That is right. So in February 1953, my wife and I were again
invited to their apartment. This may or may not have been the same
apartment we originally visited. I don't remember, sir. I know it was
up in the Bronx. I think it may have been a different apartment. Is
that right?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. As my wife and I walked in, Lee walked out and my mother
informed us that he would probably go to the Bronx Zoo. We had Sunday
dinner, and in the course of the conversation my mother informed me
that Lee was having a truancy problem and that the school officials
had suggested that he might need psychiatric aid to combat his truancy
problem.

She informed me that Lee said that he would not see a head shrinker or
nut doctor, and she wanted any suggestions or opinions from me as to
how to get him to see him, and I told her just take him down there.
That is all I could suggest.

Mr. JENNER. What was her response to that?

Mr. PIC. Well, Lee was still the boss. If he didn't want to go see the
psychiatrist, he wasn't going.

Mr. JENNER. She had no control over him?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you were quite aware of that, were you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you discuss that with her?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; she discussed it with me. I mean she told me that she
couldn't control him and so forth. This I knew.

Mr. JENNER. Did you get the impression from anything she said to you
that this truancy or this lack of control problem had been something
that had suddenly arisen or----

Mr. PIC. I think it was gradual, and getting worse and worse as time
went by.

Mr. JENNER. Sergeant, when you were still home and up to the time you
enlisted which was in January 1950, had there been any control problems
with respect to Lee? In other words, had you noticed this problem
developing, any headstrong attitudes on his part? Cudgel your mind and
take yourself back.

Mr. PIC. I would say, sir, that whenever there was a disciplinary
problem to be taken care of that it wasn't enforced with Lee by his
mother prior to 1950. She always reminded Robert and I that we were the
older and we should see to these things that he don't do them and so
forth.

Mr. JENNER. What did you and Robert do about it?

Mr. PIC. Not much, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you speak to him? You were his older brother. He had
the love and affection for you?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir; what was serious to her probably wasn't serious to
a 13- and 15-year old kid or 14-16. There was no big troubles he got
into that any kid does.

Mr. JENNER. What did you notice up until the time you enlisted
in January 1950, of Lee's relations with other children in the
neighborhood or his schoolmates. What was your overall impression,
first?

Mr. PIC. To my best recollection, sir; there were no other children in
the neighborhood of his age group that he played consistently with.
I think most of the time he went to play with other children it was
a matter of a couple, couple of blocks away or so, with his own age
group.

Mr. JENNER. Was he inclined to remain in the house rather than go out
and play with other children?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; he was more inclined to stay in the house than go
out and play.

Mr. JENNER. Was that noticeable to you?

Mr. PIC. I wasn't there that much, sir; I was working and going to
school, both. I wasn't there to observe this.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. Except maybe on a weekend occasionally.

Mr. JENNER. But you did notice that when they came to New York in 1952,
particularly in the fall of 1952, that by that time he had become quite
headstrong?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that his mother and your mother Marguerite, had pretty
well lost any influence or control over him?

Mr. PIC. That is absolutely true, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, we brought you up to enlistment in January
1953.

Mr. PIC. On the occasion when we visited them in February 1953.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. At this same time in February 1953, I received orders to
go aboard ship again, so from the time period February 1953, until
September 1953, I was in and out of New York at sea.

Mr. JENNER. Did you see either your mother or Lee during that period of
time?

Mr. PIC. I did not see Lee after the February visit, sir. I had seen
her on several occasions.

Mr. JENNER. During this----

Mr. PIC. Downtown where she worked.

Mr. JENNER. She was still working in Lerner's in the spring and summer
of 1953 or had she changed jobs?

Mr. PIC. To my best recollection it was still Lerner's.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall her working at a hosiery shop during this
period of time rather than Lerner's?

Mr. PIC. I wouldn't remember, sir.

Mr. JENNER. She might have been but you just don't have a recollection?

Mr. PIC. Wherever she was working at the time, I mean she shifted jobs
quite often and it is kind of hard keeping track of them.

Mr. JENNER. Did she have difficulty with her employers, get along with
fellow workers at these various shops?

Mr. PIC. Whenever she changed jobs she always gave me a rationalized
answer.

Mr. JENNER. Well, that is a conclusion. Tell me what it was.

Mr. PIC. I remember once, it may have been the Lerner shop or it may
have been this hosiery shop which you are referring to, that she told
me that they let her go because she didn't use an underarm deoderant.
That was the reason she gave me, sir. She said she couldn't do nothing
about it. She uses it but if it don't work what can she do about it.

Other times whenever she changed jobs it was always because the next
job was better.

Mr. JENNER. During the time, on the occasions when you saw her, which
was relatively infrequent from January of 1953 to, what is the next
date you gave, September of 1953?

Mr. PIC. August-September 1953.

Mr. JENNER. August of 1953, September of 1953, was there any discussion
with her about Lee?

Mr. PIC. When I asked about him it was the same old stuff, he is
getting along better. She would tell me that he still doesn't have
anybody to confide in, things like this.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any further discussion about truancy, any
possibility of care for him by a psychiatrist?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; when I asked about this she said everything was
working out fine.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. Whenever I would meet her it would be the same old song and
dance, like hinting around I should help support her which I couldn't
afford to do, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You had a wife and child by that time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What was your compensation?

Mr. PIC. For what, sir?

Mr. JENNER. In the service at this time.

Mr. PIC. I was petty officer, second class, I guess my base pay was
maybe $190, plus extras, quarters allowances, maybe total $300 a month.

Mr. JENNER. Was your wife still residing with your mother-in-law?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And were you contributing to the support of that whole
family unit?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Mother-in-law, wife and child?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I was paying the rent and buying the groceries. In
fact, that year I claimed my mother-in-law as a dependent on my income
tax, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By the way, you had claimed, did you, at some point in your
service your mother as a dependent?

Mr. PIC. In one of her letters she refers to that. I don't recollect
that, sir. I think it was prior to my joining the service that she
referred to. When I was working full time, maybe the year right after,
I don't remember, sir, that incident at all.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. Well, on these visits that I would spend with her downtown,
we would eat lunch or something on Saturday. It got old after a while
listening to her so I knew I was getting transferred to Virginia in
September, 1953, so my wife left in August of 1953 to live with her
sister until I was stationed there in September, 1953.

Mr. JENNER. Where did her sister live?

Mr. PIC. Norfolk, Va. And I was to be stationed at Portsmouth, Va., at
the Naval hospital there for school purposes.

When I did finally get transferred from the ship to Portsmouth, Va., I
did not make known to my mother our whereabouts or our address.

Mr. JENNER. Why not?

Mr. PIC. Like I said, sir; it was getting kind of old. The only time I
had seen her would be downtown and she didn't have much to say to me
and I didn't have too much to say to her.

Mr. JENNER. During this period of time there came about a substantially
complete rupture then between yourself and your mother?

Mr. PIC. To a certain degree.

Mr. JENNER. Did you see your brother at any time thereafter?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I did not.

Mr. JENNER. Was there an occasion in Thanksgiving 1962 when you saw him?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I can get to that. There are things happened prior
to that.

Mr. JENNER. You did see him----

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I did not see him. I seen my mother.

Mr. JENNER. I see. All right; go ahead.

Mr. PIC. I returned from Portsmouth, Va., in April 1954, sir; and took
up residency at 80 St. Marks Place, Staten Island, N.Y. We returned
really to 325 East 92d Street, stayed there a matter of a couple of
days until I found us a place to live in Staten Island and then my
wife and I moved over to Staten Island leaving my mother-in-law in
the apartment, being I felt because my wife had six brothers and
sisters that they could worry about her. I didn't see that it was my
responsibility much longer. My wife was the youngest child, and we
lived there almost 2 years.

I was then assigned to the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter _Halfmoon_, which
is a weather vessel, and this is where I am in and out for 6-, 7-week
periods at a time. It was during this time that she wrote me at the
base, my mother, and informed me that they were back in New Orleans,
and you have the letters referring to this, sir.

It was either sometime in the fall of 1955 or the winter of 1956 that
my mother called me from New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. By telephone?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; and said she wanted to visit again.

Mr. JENNER. You were then in New York?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; well, Lee was still with her, and my wife frowned
upon this, and being that we did have a one-bedroom apartment, and we
did have two children at this time there was no way at all we could
accommodate two of them. She was very upset about this that I wouldn't
have her up. There was nothing I could do about it, though. I knew if
she came up they were coming up to stay, and I didn't want a repeat
of what we had. So in February 1956, I joined the Air Force and was
stationed at Mitchel Air Force Base in New York which is about 30, 40
miles east of New York City. In October 1956, Lee joined the Marine
Corps.

Mr. JENNER. How did that come to your attention?

Mr. PIC. My mother informed me of this fact.

Mr. JENNER. By letter?

Mr. PIC. We were writing again. So, it was just a matter of
corresponding by mail up until the Christmas holidays of 1957 when my
mother--let me make sure that date is right--I am fairly certain, sir;
that it was the Christmas holidays of 1957 rather than the Christmas
holidays of 1958--that she visited us.

Mr. JENNER. She did come to New York?

Mr. PIC. Right. She come to--we had moved to 104 Avenue C East Meadow,
on Long Island. I had two children but we had a 3-bedroom apartment
which was part of base housing and we could accommodate her here.

She came from Fort Worth when she arrived. Somehow or another between
New Orleans and this visit she and Lee had gone back to Fort Worth.

Mr. JENNER. You were aware of the fact she had returned to Fort Worth?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you learned that through correspondence?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. With her.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; her position at that time, so she told us, was that
she was a greeter for the city of Fort Worth. She would welcome people
to town and things like this.

Mr. JENNER. I think she was employed for a while in an organization
called Welcome Wagon. That is a national organization.

Mr. PIC. When she was employed is when she visited us. I think this was
Christmas of 1957, is that right?

Mr. ELY. I think that would be the same thing probably, Welcome Wagon
greets people.

Mr. PIC. Is this 1957 when she had that job?

Mr. JENNER. I am not sure of the date but it is true that during that,
when she returned to Fort Worth sometime along there she did have a
position of that character.

Mr. PIC. She stayed over the Christmas holidays, left approximately the
10th of January, sometime.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have conversations here about Lee during that time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What did she say?

Mr. PIC. Lee was in the Marine Corps, Lee was very happy to be in the
Marine Corps, Lee was proud to be in the Marine Corps. Lee loved the
Marine Corps. He just liked it.

Mr. JENNER. I see. What had occurred to Robert in the meantime? This is
December of 1957. Was he still in the service?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he was not, I don't believe. I think he had gotten
discharged and gotten married, was residing in Fort Worth with his
wife.

Mr. JENNER. He was discharged in the spring of 1956-1957, rather; and
stayed at Exchange Alley for a short while.

Mr. PIC. I don't know that.

Mr. JENNER. Then went to Fort Worth and your mother and your brother
Lee followed and your brother Lee attended high school for about 6 or 7
weeks in the fall of 1957 in Fort Worth, Arlington Heights High School,
and enlisted in October 1957, in the Marines.

Mr. PIC. Lee enlisted in 1956, I believe.

Mr. ELY. 1956.

Mr. JENNER. 1956 was it. Then your brother Robert was discharged,
mustered out in 1956?

Mr. PIC. That sounds about right. And stayed in Exchange Alley a short
time, didn't like it, went on to Fort Worth.

After she left in January of 1958 we continued to communicate by mail
and every now and then a phone call.

Then in August of 1958 I received my orders to Japan, and we left
Mitchel and departed cross country.

Mr. JENNER. You and your wife and children?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By what, automobile?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By this time you owned an automobile?

Mr. PIC. My second one.

Mr. JENNER. Second one?

Mr. PIC. I purchased my first one when I was stationed in Virginia. We
arrived in Fort Worth, approximately 28, 29 October 1958. I remember we
were in her house on Halloween night because I pulled the car up behind
and locked the gates so I would not have my hub caps stolen.

Mr. JENNER. Where did she reside then?

Mr. PIC. I think you ought to refresh my memory on that. It was a
little circle. Did she have an address with a little circle, some kind
of circle or something?

Mr. JENNER. Do you have that?

Mr. PIC. What she lived on described the street, it was a circle,
something like that.

Mr. JENNER. Her first house and apartment in New York was 325, that was
your apartment, 325 East 92. And then she moved over to 1455 Sheridan
Avenue in the Bronx, and then 825 East 179th Street in the Bronx. 3124
West Fifth Street, Fort Worth.

Mr. PIC. That isn't familiar.

Mr. JENNER. It is not familiar?

Mr. PIC. It could be it, though, I can probably find it on the map of
Fort Worth if we still have got it because I remember that place real
well. I was thrown out of there. Some people hold a grudge a long time.
Sir, that is probably it, West Fifth Street, because the location West
Fifth Street is probably about the same place.

Mr. JENNER. You said you were thrown out of there. I assume an incident
occurred?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I am getting to that.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. While we were staying there, I was traveling cross country and
really didn't know where I was going or what time I would have to be
there. We were waiting for our port call to know when we would have to
be in San Francisco to catch our flight out of there, and so I had no
idea how long I would be in Fort Worth, and so I made a phone call from
there to Mitchel to try to find out, and didn't find out anything.

Then the Sunday that we were there--well, prior to this, when we
arrived there the same day my brother Robert came over to see us. He
was then working for a milk company, Borden's Milk Co., I believe. He
was giving my mother free milk, all the extras that he had and so forth.

Mr. JENNER. This is the first time you had seen your brother Robert, I
take it, since his visit to New York City, is that correct?

Mr. PIC. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. And that was a cordial reunion, was it?

Mr. PIC. Yes; it was.

Mr. JENNER. Was your mother working at that time?

Mr. PIC. She was working, sir, when we arrived there, at Cox, I
believe, Department Store at the candy counter, I believe it was Cox, I
know she was working at a candy counter.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. When we got there, my mother informed us she had no food in
the house so my wife and I went and bought a whole bunch of groceries
for our stay which we expected to do. I got in contact with some old
friends, and they invited me over for Sunday dinner the following
Sunday at their house, and being I was pressed for time I had another
Sunday dinner invitation at my brother Robert's house. My mother was
invited to this dinner.

Mr. JENNER. At your brother's?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. He then resided at 7313 Davenport Street, I believe. Well, it
seems that my mother declined her part of the invitation, and was quite
put out that my wife and I did not decline our part because she decided
that we should spend Sunday dinner eating with her. So, my wife and
I and two children drove off to my brother Robert's house to go eat.
After we were there for about a half hour, she called us up and told me
to come get our bags, that we would have to leave.

So, my wife and I, we left the kids at my brother Robert's because we
knew there would be a big scene with all the trimmings, and we went
back and we walked in, didn't say nothing, just packed up our bags and
she was yelling and screaming reminding us about the time we threw her
out of the apartment in New York and she was getting even with us for
this when we threw her and Lee out.

I then informed her that I wanted nothing more to do with her and that
every time she and my wife got together, that she had nothing but bad
things to say about her. And I let her know that our relationship ends
right then and there, and since that time, sir, I have not written her,
talked to her, anything.

Mr. JENNER. Or seen her.

Mr. PIC. Or have seen her, except in magazines and stuff. She has sent
me a bunch of junk in the mail. During this conversation when we was
getting thrown out, I reminded her that she made nothing but trouble
for us and especially my wife, she was always on my wife. And so I owed
her a few dollars for the phone call I had made, so I gave her $10 and
this seemed to satisfy, well, probably accomplished what she set out to
do, get some money off of me one way or the other. This I how I looked
at it. This didn't upset her, after we left, after I gave her $10. So,
we went to my brother Robert's, we ate, we stayed at their house until
Tuesday morning, and we left and then went to Japan, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Let's suspend for dinner.

Mr. PIC. Could I just add one thing, sir?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. While we were there, I was informed that Lee was in Japan.

Mr. JENNER. You were informed by your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. And that we should see him when we get there.

Mr. JENNER. Were you advised as to where in Japan he was?

Mr. PIC. I was given his address, sir. After arriving there it was just
a matter of a week or so I received a letter from my mother which I
never acknowledged or maybe it was my brother, it was one of the two,
saying Lee was traveling across the United States at the same time I
was. He had left Japan before I arrived in Japan. I arrived in Japan 10
November 1958 and I don't know what date he left, sir. I never got to
see him in Japan. This would probably be a good time to suspend.

Mr. JENNER. Before we do that, did you have any conversation with your
brother about, your brother Robert about your brother Lee while you
were there in 1958?

Mr. PIC. I think I may have let him know how Lee acted toward me. He
didn't want nothing to do with me. The only things I heard about Lee
was that he was in the Marine Corps and he liked it.

Mr. JENNER. Did your brother Robert say anything about having been in
New Orleans before he came to Fort Worth?

Mr. PIC. He told me about a trip that he made to pick them up or
something down there. They called him up one time and he drove down and
got them and drove back all in the same trip.

Mr. JENNER. That must have been the time when they left New Orleans and
came to Fort Worth.

Mr. PIC. Sir, in the testimony of Marilyn Murret, I am going to make a
statement.

Mr. JENNER. What testimony of Marilyn Murret?

Mr. PIC. This is what I am going to tell you that prior to his
defection she knew he was in Europe and everywhere that I read in here,
no one knew he was going to Europe. She informed me before anyone knew
he defected that he was in Europe.

Mr. JENNER. Who informed you?

Mr. PIC. Marilyn Murret in Japan. She was in Japan. She visited with me.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I will go into that right after dinner.

Mr. PIC. All right, sir.

Mr. JENNER. We will suspend until 7:30.

(Whereupon, at 6:30 p.m., the proceeding was recessed.)


TESTIMONY OF JOHN EDWARD PIC RESUMED

The proceeding was reconvened at 7:55 p.m.

Mr. JENNER. When we adjourned for dinner you were telling us the
incident in August, I believe it was 1958, when you visited your mother
and your brother on your way to California on your assignment to Japan.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Would you read me the last answer of the witness, please?

(The answer, as recorded, was read by the reporter.)

Mr. JENNER. Marilyn Murret is your cousin?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. One of the children of Charles and Lillian Murret?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By the way, did your wife and children accompany you to
Japan?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you arrived in Japan about when?

Mr. PIC. 10 November 1958, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Were you aware before you left for Japan that Marilyn
Murret, was in Japan?

Mr. PIC. She was not in Japan then, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. You arrived in Japan and went over there
sometime while you were in Japan. By the way, first where were you
stationed?

Mr. PIC. My military address was U.S.A.F. Hospital, Tachikawa, APO 323,
San Francisco, Calif.

Mr. JENNER. You heard from or saw Marilyn Murret after you got there?

Mr. PIC. Right. In approximately October-November, early November,
the end of October 1959 she called me up at the hospital, and it had
been years since I had seen her, and she told me she had come from
Australia. She was traveling around the world, and I invited her out to
the house the next weekend.

She couldn't come during the week. She was teaching school in Japan and
as a freelance teacher working for no agency, just doing this to earn
her own traveling money. So she visited us on a Sunday, I believe.

We talked about the family and everything. She talked about Lee, about
how proud he was to be in the Marine Corps, and he really put on a big
show about this.

Mr. JENNER. How did she know that, did she reveal?

Mr. PIC. She had seen him, evidently, when he was first in the Marine
Corps. She described him in uniform, and----

Mr. JENNER. You had the impression she had actually seen him in Japan?

Mr. PIC. No; she wasn't in Japan the same time he was. This is a year
after I am in Japan, sir, before I had seen her.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. And she had seen him when he first joined the Marine Corps,
is my impression, sometime while he was in the Marine Corps and in the
States.

Mr. JENNER. You had the impression that Lee had visited their home in
New Orleans?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that is the impression I got.

Mr. JENNER. Go on.

Mr. PIC. Well, at this time, my mother was still writing to me, I never
answered any of her letters. Maybe I would receive a letter from her
every once, every 2 or 3 months. I also was aware of the fact that Lee
was going to be discharged from the Marine Corps.

Mr. JENNER. You became aware of that through what means?

Mr. PIC. The letters I would receive from my mother. She informed me
that Marilyn Murret--that Lee upon his discharge had gone to Europe. I
asked her how did he ever decide that, and where did he get the money
and she said he saved it while he was in the Marine Corps.

Mr. JENNER. Did she say he had gone to Europe?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. Her quote, sir, to the best of my knowledge, "Do you
know that Lee is in Europe?" I said, "No, I don't know that." I had no
way of knowing that. So I started asking her about him, and this is
what she told me that Lee had gone to Europe.

It was that night, sir, on the 9 o'clock news that I learned that Lee
had defected.

Mr. JENNER. You say 9 o'clock news--was that----

Mr. PIC. Japan time, sir, that night.

Mr. JENNER. I mean, what source was the news?

Mr. PIC. American Armed Forces Network. My wife and I were in bed,
and I was about half asleep, and the radio was closest to her and she
nudged me and told me, and I said, "No, it couldn't be." So the next
day it appeared in the paper.

Mr. JENNER. What paper?

Mr. PIC. The Stars and Stripes, sir. Then I heard it on the radio again
the next day. There were a couple or three articles in the Stars and
Stripes about his defection. And I reported to the OSI and told them
who I was, and I told them who he was. Then I got in contact with the
Embassy in Japan.

Mr. JENNER. That is the American Embassy?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; and attempted to contact Lee. The only thing I
could get out was a telegram. I think my quote in the telegram was
"Please reconsider your actions." This, I understand, was delivered to
him at the Metropole Hotel in Moscow. After this defection I received
several----

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. When you heard this what was your reaction?

Mr. PIC. I didn't believe it. I mean my wife told me it was him, and
I think I stayed awake until the 10 o'clock news to hear it and they
mentioned it, and that was it, and so the next day it was in the paper
and that is when I reported to the OSI.

Mr. JENNER. What is OSI?

Mr. PIC. Office of Special Investigator, I believe, for the Air Force.

Mr. JENNER. Well, after the rebroadcasts and you became convinced it
was your brother what was your reaction?

Mr. PIC. It was hard to believe. It was just something you never expect.

Mr. JENNER. Had he done or said anything during all your life together
which served to lead you to think, well maybe it is so that he has?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir, ever since he was born and I was old enough to
remember, I always had a feeling that some great tragedy was going to
strike Lee in some way or another, and when this happened I figured
this was it. In fact, on the very day of the assassination I was
thinking about it when I was getting ready to go to work, and just,
I was thinking about him at that time and I figured well, when he
defected and came back--that was his big tragedy. I found out it wasn't.

Mr. JENNER. Would you give me--elaborate on that. Why did you have a
feeling for some time that someday he would have, would suffer a great
tragedy?

Mr. PIC. I don't know. It was just one of those things I can't explain.
I always had this feeling about him. Not as a kid, of course, but in my
young adulthood I thought that about him, especially after the incident
in New York. I thought this way. I had this feeling.

Mr. JENNER. You had a feeling at any time that he was groping for
a position or station in life, that he realized was beyond his
attainment, or any resentment on his part of his station in life?

Mr. PIC. I think he resented the fact that he never really had a
father, especially after he lost Mr. Ekdahl and his one and only chance
to get what he was looking for. Maybe that is why he looked to Robert
and I like he did.

Mr. JENNER. Did you see Marilyn Murret again?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; she and I never discussed this. Those were the
orders of OSI, not to discuss it with anyone. I made them aware of her,
her presence in Japan. I don't know if they ever contacted her or not,
sir. I told them about her mentioning this to me that she knew he was
in Europe. How she knew, I don't know, sir. And everything I have read
states that no one knew he was going.

Mr. JENNER. But she was in your home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The very day that the announcement was made?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That Lee had defected to Russia?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; and the radio wasn't on or anything. I had the
hi-fi, she liked classical music, and I was playing some of my
records for her, and at no time during the day did we have any radio
broadcasts. She came about noon. Maybe it was on prior to this, I don't
think so, because at 9 o'clock----

Mr. JENNER. If it had been on, prior to that time, she didn't mention
any defection? All she said to you was, "Did you know that Lee was in
Europe?" Is that correct?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir. She didn't specify any country. In fact,
I asked her what country, and she said she didn't know. She just knew
he was in Europe. She had come from Australia to Japan. I think she may
have been in Japan a month prior to contacting me, a month, a little
less probably.

Mr. JENNER. You saw her again after that, did you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; she visited our house several times. I think the
last time we seen her was about April or May 1960 when she left Japan.
We never seen her again. She said she would contact us and tell us when
she was leaving, but she never did.

Mr. JENNER. What was your assignment in Japan?

Mr. PIC. I was a medical laboratory technician at the hospital there,
sir.

Mr. JENNER. When did you return to the United States?

Mr. PIC. July 1962, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And to where did you return?

Mr. PIC. To Lackland Air Force Base where I am presently stationed. In
Japan, there is more that happened, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. I received--I wrote Lee, I mean Robert, and asked him about
this. Of course in Japan we didn't get much news and the OSI wouldn't
tell me too much. The Embassy, all they confirmed is that he did
defect. I guess in a period of 2, 3 months I got information from
Robert through several letters. Every time I got some information
I went to the OSI about this. It seems there was a letter, I don't
remember if Robert had copied it from Lee's letter or he had sent me
the original letter. I showed this, I gave it to the OSI. If they gave
it back, it is destroyed now, sir. In this letter he said that no one
should try to contact him because the American capitalists would be
listening over the phone. He mentioned that he had been contemplating
this act for quite awhile. That no one knew it. This is all in my OSI
report.

And from what other information I had, I received the impression that
him turning toward communism or Marxism, whichever you want to call
it, took place while he was in Japan and in the Marine Corps, sir,
from the insinuations that were involved in the letter or from his own
statements.

Mr. JENNER. Up to this time, Sergeant, in all your association with
your brother, had there been occasions when there were discussions
with him in the family about any theories or reactions of his toward
democracy, communism, Marxism, or any other form of government?

Mr. PIC. Sir, the last time he talked to me, I think he was only about
12, 13 years old.

Mr. JENNER. Well, the answer is no?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; that is the answer--no, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is that there hadn't been any such discussions?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You--I take it from that answer--you never heard him assert
any views?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. On his part, with respect to that subject matter?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

While I was processing to return to the States, I had seen in the paper
and everything that Lee was returning to the United States. When I
got my assignment to Lackland, the OSI kind of put it to me that if I
didn't want to be in the same vicinity as Lee that they could change
my orders, and I told them that the United States felt he was reliable
enough for, confident enough in him to let him return, that I would see
no reason to change my assignment. The OSI authorities said there was
no objection to me visiting him, talking to him or anything else. So I
didn't make any attempt to get my assignment changed because of these
reasons. Being it was close enough, you know, to see him fairly easily.

Mr. JENNER. Did anything else occur that you think is pertinent to the
time of your return to the United States?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; the only thing I knew about him was what I read in
the newspaper about him returning with his wife and child.

Mr. JENNER. When you say newspapers this is the Stars and Stripes?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; Stars and Stripes.

Mr. JENNER. That is before you returned to this country you had read in
the Stars and Stripes that he had returned to the United States?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he was on his way, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He was on his way back?

Mr. PIC. He was on his way back at the same time I was on my way back.

Mr. JENNER. You knew he was on his way back, according to the Stars and
Stripes, with his wife and child?

Mr. PIC. Yes; sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you arrived at Lackland Air Force Base when?

Mr. PIC. I arrived in the San Antonio area approximately the 21st of
July 1962, and got a house, got settled and then I signed in on my base
in August. I was permitted 30 days leave, 13 days travel time, which I
took advantage of. I think I took 27 days leave. So I started work in
August, the latter part of August.

Mr. JENNER. During that period of time of your 30 days' leave, after
arriving at Lackland Air Force Base and San Antonio, did you make any
attempt to find out anything about your brother, where he was?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I called Robert, and we wrote a couple of letters,
and he told me Lee was back, and he was living in Dallas and working
there, and everything seemed to be okay.

Mr. JENNER. Did your brother tell you that Lee, when he returned to
this country, had lived with him for a while?

Mr. PIC. I don't know if it was in these conversations. I learned at
the Thanksgiving reunion that he did.

Mr. JENNER. Which was Thanksgiving of 1962?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Up to the time you saw your brother, I take it, you saw him
Thanksgiving 1962?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; we arrived at my brother Robert's Thanksgiving Day
between about 11:30, 12:30.

Mr. JENNER. In the morning?

Mr. PIC. In the morning. We were to meet Lee and his wife at the
Greyhound bus station approximately 2 o'clock. So Robert and I went
down to pick him up. We picked them up outside the Greyhound bus
station. Whether or not they--we had no way of seeing them getting
off a bus. They were at the station when we got there. We did all the
friendly sayings and I was----

Mr. JENNER. Tell us what happened now? What was the attitude, what were
your impressions?

Mr. PIC. Well, I still was wondering if he was going to have this
feeling of hostility toward me that he had shown the last time he had
seen me, but it didn't manifest itself whatsoever. He introduced me to
his wife, and I gave her a kiss, and his child. We got in the car, and
he said I hadn't changed much, and we just talked like that. At no time
did Marina speak any English. She would ask him questions in what I
believe was Russian and he would talk back to her in--and talk through.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have any discussion with him on that subject--where
he had learned Russian?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir, I knew he had been in Russia over 2 years, so
evidently he had learned Russian while there.

Mr. JENNER. There was no occasion because of that, it never occurred to
you to ask him about how and when he had learned?

Mr. PIC. I wasn't going to pry into his affairs, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You didn't?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I didn't.

Mr. JENNER. Did you inquire of him as to his life in Russia?

Mr. PIC. We let him do the talking, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did he speak of it?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; he did.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say?

Mr. PIC. He told us he worked in a factory there.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say what kind of work he did?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he didn't.

Mr. JENNER. What kind of a factory it was?

Mr. PIC. Something to do with metalwork, aluminum, something like that,
I believe. He told me he was making about $80 a month, I think, while
he worked there.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say he had accommodations that supplemented that
salary? Was there anything about whether he had to pay rent or not pay
rent for his quarters?

Mr. PIC. He didn't talk about anything prior to him and Marina being
married.

Mr. JENNER. He did not?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; all the conversation was after their marriage.

Mr. JENNER. No discussion of his as to why he went to Russia in the
first place?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion of his defection or attempted
defection?

Mr. PIC. Per se, no, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You are qualifying that. You say per se.

Mr. PIC. Right. He did mention that because of his actions he had
received a dishonorable discharge from the Marine Corps and that he was
attempting to get this changed to an honorable status.

Mr. JENNER. Did he appear bitter about it?

Mr. PIC. He showed us his card which stated dishonorable or bad
conduct, something like that. I think it was dishonorable. He showed it
to me.

Mr. JENNER. What was his--what impression did you have as to his
overall attitude? What impression did you have as to his state of mind?

Mr. PIC. He impressed me that he was glad to be back, that he didn't
really enjoy his stay in Russia. He commented about the hard life they
had there.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say about that?

Mr. PIC. What did he say, sir?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. A shortage of food, rationing of certain items, about eating a
lot of cabbage. He did say that the U.S. Government gave him the money
to come back on. He was in the process of paying them back. In fact, he
let it be known that regardless of anything else he was going to pay
the Government back.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say "regardless of anything else, I am going to pay
them back"? On what do you base that conclusory statement?

Mr. PIC. Well, he made the statement they paid and he is paying them
back, and he has got this job and he was telling me his financial
situation, and saying so much money is going to pay the Government back.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say about his financial situation?

Mr. PIC. He didn't give me--this is what he gave me for an address.
He said he lived in an apartment, one room apartment. They had no
television, no radio, no coffee pot. In fact, we brought him a coffee
pot for a present. Gave them a coffee pot and bought the little girl a
stuffed animal of some type.

Mr. JENNER. Thanksgiving Day you did this?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. How come you brought him a coffee pot?

Mr. PIC. I was going to give him a present.

Mr. JENNER. It is the coffee pot that interests me. Here you hadn't
seen him for a long time, you were bringing him a gift--why were you----

Mr. PIC. Well, my wife being a Yankee----

Mr. JENNER. Why did you bring him a coffee pot?

Mr. PIC. My wife in her Yankee ways believed when you don't see people
a long time you bring them a gift. It's just a token. We brought my
brother Robert a present, a set of dishes I had in Japan, I bought
them in Japan, and so naturally we couldn't give them anything without
giving the other people something.

Mr. JENNER. It isn't the fact that you brought him a gift. I can
understand that. That would be, I might be even a little surprised
if you hadn't. It is the particular gift in which I am interested.
Why did you select a coffee pot? Was there something that led to that
particular selection on your part?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; we didn't know what really to bring them, and my wife
says, it was one of these glass coffee pots that you put the candle
under, you see, it wasn't a regular percolator. It was one of these
that a hostess always likes to have available to pour coffee out of.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. And my wife had one, and she liked it so she figured we would
give them one.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Tell us everything that occurred on that day, what he said, what Robert
said that is pertinent, what you said, things that occurred, just
completely exhaust your recollection.

Mr. PIC. Well, Lee informed us that he was working at some type
photography printing company.

Mr. JENNER. In Dallas?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; in Dallas.

Mr. JENNER. You were advised during the course of that day he was then
at that time living in Dallas?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that is what he said.

Mr. JENNER. And working in some kind of photographic work in Dallas?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. I said he referred to their living conditions.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say?

Mr. PIC. They had a one-room, I think it was one room. They ate
and slept in the same room, I believe. They had no radio, no TV.
That Marina, when they first arrived, was really astounded about
supermarkets. Every time she went in one she lost control of herself.

Marina herself wore no lipstick, very plainly dressed. Lee appeared to
be a good father in that he would relieve Marina the burden of holding
the child and taking care of it.

Mr. JENNER. How was he attired when you met him at the bus station?

Mr. PIC. He had on a sport jacket and tie. Sports jacket and tie.

Mr. JENNER. He was clean and neat?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. How did Marina and your brother Lee appear to be getting
along?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir; being they only spoke Russian to each other, I
don't know what they said but they appeared to be just like any other
married couple married a year or 2.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any conversation during the course of the day in
which you participated or overheard as to Marina's undertaking to learn
English?

Mr. PIC. Well, my sister-in-law, Vada----

Mr. JENNER. That is Robert's wife?

Mr. PIC. Wife. Of course, she had, she and my wife had a lot to say
to each other, and through my wife, I found out what Vada had said
to her, that Lee did not permit Marina to wear any lipstick, he did
not permit her to learn English. My wife, she thought this was really
absurd and said the best thing to do was to get them a TV set and let
her sit home and learn English. My wife thought it was terrible the way
her conditions were as far as this was concerned. The girls seemed to
gather in the dinette and we sat around in the living room, talking.

Mr. JENNER. Was anything said by Vada or your wife on that occasion as
to the reason why Lee was not permitting Marina to learn English and
speak it and write it?

Mr. PIC. Well, my wife assumed that if she did ever learn English she
would wise up, being we had seen the Japanese wise with their husbands.
For example, while they were living over in Japan and the wife is
usually meek and mild but when they get over here they change, you see,
she gets her American ways, and lowers the boom on the husband like all
the other American wives do. And my wife was under the impression that
this would happen if once she did learn English and everything.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Keep talking about what occurred on this
particular day, what was said, what your impressions were until you
exhaust all of your recollection.

Mr. PIC. Well, Marina and the two wives helped prepare the meal, set
the table, and we ate, and there was family talk. At no time did we
mention our mother. She wasn't present. In fact--I will take that
statement back.

Some time during our stay there Vada mentioned that she had seen my
mother driving around with a man and she thought she had remarried.
This may have been that day, it may have been a day or so later. We
stayed there Thursday, Friday, and Saturday and we left Sunday.

Mr. JENNER. Was anything said during the course of that occasion or
in your presence or reported to you by your wife, as to how Vada and
Marina had gotten along while the Oswalds, your brother, and she lived
with your brother Robert and your sister-in-law Vada?

Mr. PIC. I wouldn't remember that, sir. If it was any talk it was
probably on caring, and so forth, about the child and so forth, which
is small talk to the men, of course.

Mr. JENNER. Did you learn on that day that Lee had lived with your
brother for a while?

Mr. PIC. I had learned during that time period that Lee and Marina had
lived with Robert when they returned, and that an attempt was made by
the press and TV to contact them, but Robert wouldn't let them. He
wasn't going to go through it again. Robert only had a one--two-bedroom
apartment, I mean house, and I am sure when we stayed there we were
crowded a little bit. My wife and I slept on the floor, and I am sure
Marina and Robert, I don't know where they slept--I mean Lee.

Mr. JENNER. Your children slept in the bed and you and your wife slept
on a mattress on the floor?

Mr. PIC. A couple of blankets on the floor, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you learn during that period of time that Lee had lived
with your brother for a time?

Mr. PIC. Possibly, sir; I don't recall.

Mr. JENNER. Was anything said about the fact or any allusion to the
fact that during this period, up to Thanksgiving Day, there had been a
time when Marina had not lived with your brother Lee?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. I understood they arrived from New York, at New York
together, and proceeded--there was a short stay, I think, mentioned in
New York. Where they stayed, I don't know, sir, and then they proceeded
to Texas and lived with Robert.

Mr. JENNER. I am referring particularly to September and October and
part of November 1962. Was there any reference or any discussion of it
or anything said in your presence of the fact that Marina had lived
apart, separate and apart from Lee?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. During one or more periods of time in September or October
and November 1962?

Mr. PIC. Possibly it could have been being Marina stayed there while
Lee went to look for a job in Dallas. I think, that may have been
mentioned.

Mr. JENNER. Was there at any time mentioned even while he was working
in Fort Worth, fully employed that she had separated from him and gone
to live elsewhere?

Mr. PIC. I am not aware that he did work in Fort Worth, sir, at any
time.

Mr. JENNER. You didn't learn at that time, Thanksgiving, that he had
worked in Fort Worth?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was the Leslie Welding Co. mentioned at all?

Mr. PIC. Something about welding was mentioned, that he tried it when
he first came back, now that you mention it.

Mr. JENNER. Was it your impression or did you gain the impression then
that he had had some employment in Fort Worth then as a welder?

Mr. PIC. I don't remember if it was Fort Worth, sir, or where it was. I
just know that welding was mentioned.

Mr. JENNER. In that connection, was it mentioned or in any fashion
indicated to you that he had been employed as a welder whether in Fort
Worth or otherwise, but he had been employed as a welder?

Mr. PIC. It was my impression because of his experience in the Soviet
Union working with metals that this helped him in getting his job as a
welder.

Mr. JENNER. When he first returned?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that that was a position or work that he had had prior
to the time that he obtained the position in Dallas about which he
spoke?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is a position preceding his work in the photography
field in some firm in Dallas?

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. Anything said about his financial status--that is, his and
Marina's, and the child?

Mr. PIC. Well, he said he wasn't making very much money, but they were
managing to get by. They couldn't afford a TV, couldn't afford a radio,
couldn't afford these necessities of life.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything during the course of that day on the
subject of any political philosophy of his?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; not at all.

Mr. JENNER. Politics wasn't discussed?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Whether party politics or politics in the broad sense?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; not at all.

Mr. JENNER. How did he look to you physically as compared with when you
had seen him last?

Mr. PIC. I would have never recognized him, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Your brother Robert said something along these
lines. You had last seen him in 19--that was prior to this occasion,
the last time you had seen him was when he was in New York City?

Mr. PIC. Which was a little over 10 years.

Mr. JENNER. Well, just about 10 years.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Of course you had seen him in February 1953, I think you
said.

Mr. PIC. Right. But we walked in and he walked out.

Mr. JENNER. But you saw him?

Mr. PIC. Right, I had seen him for a moment.

Mr. JENNER. He was then at that particular time in the neighborhood of
13 years of age?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Now, when you saw him 10 years later he was 23.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You noticed, did you, a material change, physically first,
let's take his physical appearance?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. Physically I noticed that.

Mr. JENNER. What did you notice?

Mr. PIC. He was much thinner than I had remembered him. He didn't have
as much hair.

Mr. JENNER. Did that arrest your attention? Was that a material
difference? Did that strike you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; it struck me quite profusely.

Mr. JENNER. What else did you notice about his physical appearance that
arrested your attention?

Mr. PIC. His face features were somewhat different, being his eyes
were set back maybe, you know like in these Army pictures, they looked
different than I remembered him. His face was rounder. Marilyn had
described him to me when he went in the Marine Corps as having a bull
neck. This I didn't notice at all. I looked for this, I didn't notice
this at all, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He seemed more slender?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He had materially less hair?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. His eyes seemed a little sunken?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did he give you the appearance of--was he taut, was he
relaxed or taut, or just what appearance did he have in that connection?

Mr. PIC. Sir, he didn't strike me as being relaxed because I was not
with him.

Mr. JENNER. You were not?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; because of these other feelings we had developed 10
years prior to this. I wondered about how he still felt about that.

Mr. JENNER. But nothing occurred to lead you to believe that he still
remembered it vividly, or did or didn't?

Mr. PIC. When he was introduced to my wife again he did mention that he
remembered her. But other than that, he completely ignored her.

Mr. JENNER. Was that pretty obvious?

Mr. PIC. To her it was, sir. She mentioned it to me several times. He
arrived about 2.

Mr. JENNER. In the afternoon?

Mr. PIC. Right; and that is when we picked him up, so I guess we ate
about 3, 4 o'clock or so. And then the girls cleared off the table and
they sat and had coffee and I took them out, they wanted to see my car.

Mr. JENNER. Took who out?

Mr. PIC. Lee and Robert both. They looked at my car.

Mr. JENNER. Did you take Marina out with you?

Mr. PIC. No; she stayed in the house with the girls, and we talked
about cars.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say about a car?

Mr. PIC. I was made aware sometime during the day that he wasn't
driving. Other than this----

Mr. JENNER. How did you become aware of that?

Mr. PIC. He said he couldn't get a license, to me.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say why he couldn't get a license?

Mr. PIC. He said it and give me the impression because of his
citizenship status being he had a dishonorable discharge.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see your brother Lee Harvey Oswald drive an
automobile?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; never in my life.

Mr. JENNER. While you boys were still in Fort Worth and before you
enlisted in the Coast Guard in January 1950 had you--you had an
automobile, didn't you?

Mr. PIC. I drove the family car.

Mr. JENNER. Did your brother Robert drive?

Mr. PIC. He may have known how. He was not permitted to drive the
family car.

Mr. JENNER. I remember when I was a boy I wasn't permitted to drive the
family car, in the broad sense.

Mr. PIC. Right. He never swiped it.

Mr. JENNER. I was permitted to drive it up and down the driveway or
when my father was with me, I could drive it around the block or
something like that the way kids do. Was Robert permitted to do that on
a limited scale?

Mr. PIC. I wouldn't remember that, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you own what we used to call in my day an old jalopy
while you were still in Fort Worth?

Mr. PIC. That picture of that automobile there was quite an old jalopy,
sir.

Mr. JENNER. That was before you enlisted?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did your brother Robert ever drive that?

Mr. PIC. To the best of my recollection, no, sir. In fact, I only drove
it a few times myself. This is the picture with the dog.

Mr. JENNER. That is the picture of the car in John Pic's Exhibit No. 55?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Lee never drove it, to your knowledge?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was your brother Robert interested in automobiles?

Mr. PIC. All kids are interested in automobiles.

Mr. JENNER. No; please--was he interested in automobiles?

Mr. PIC. Sure, he wanted to drive. He seen I was driving so he wanted
to drive and he wasn't as old as I was, I was permitted to drive and he
wasn't.

Mr. JENNER. What about your brother Lee Harvey Oswald in that respect?

Mr. PIC. I don't know if he ever was really interested at that age to
drive a car or not, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was anything said on the day, Thanksgiving Day 1962, to
lead you to believe that he knew how to drive or operate an automobile?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. By the way, are you right handed?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Is your brother Lee right or left handed?

Mr. PIC. I think he was right handed, sir. I think we were all right
handed, Robert had tendencies toward the left hand and I think my
mother made him change.

Mr. JENNER. Was anything said during the course of that occasion when
you saw him about his experiences in the Marines?

Mr. PIC. There probably was, sir, but I don't remember what they
referred to. I know he told me he was at Atsugo Naval Air Station. This
I didn't know until he told me exactly where he was in Japan. I was
familiar with the Atsugo area.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about having been in the Philippines?

Mr. PIC. Reading the magazine I now know that----

Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything then?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; at that time I don't remember knowing that he had
been in the Philippines.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about ever having been in Formosa?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. Just Japan, I think possibly Korea, maybe, was
mentioned.

Mr. JENNER. But there was no discussion of his marine career to speak
of?

Mr. PIC. He was affiliated with radar, he told me, radio radar.

Mr. JENNER. Did the subject arise of why he went to Russia?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That was not discussed at all?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Nothing was said? Anything said about his experiences in
Russia prior to the time he became married there?

Mr. PIC. No sir; he didn't mention that at all to me.

Mr. JENNER. And anything said about his problems with the--I will
withdraw that.

Was anything said about his defection or attempted defection to Russia?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he did not mention his defection at all. Why he did
it or how he did it, he didn't mention anything, and I didn't ask him.

Mr. JENNER. During the several days you were in Fort Worth visiting
your brother Robert, did you and he go hunting?

Mr. PIC. We went fishing, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Fishing? I take it you did not go hunting.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; not at that particular time. When I first went there
in 1958, we did go hunting.

Mr. JENNER. I see. When you three boys were in Fort Worth, that is
before you enlisted in January 1950, did you boys occasionally go
hunting?

Mr. PIC. We had no firearms whatsoever, sir, in the house.

Mr. JENNER. So you did not go hunting?

Mr. PIC. I didn't. Robert possibly did with some friends of his. I
don't think Lee ever did. We went fishing several times.

Mr. JENNER. After you returned to this country in 1962, thereafter
there were occasions, where there, or some one occasion, at least, when
you did go squirrel or rabbit hunting with your brother Robert?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; that was in 1958.

Mr. JENNER. Oh, yes. When you were traveling across country to
California?

Mr. PIC. Yes; we went to his in-law's farm and we did a little hunting
on his father-in-law's property.

Mr. JENNER. What kind of firearms?

Mr. PIC. .22, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Single shot?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You say the subject of your mother was not mentioned in the
course of this Thanksgiving Day visit?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; Robert and I never brought her up in any
conversations we had.

Mr. JENNER. Did Lee?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say about her?

Mr. PIC. He mentioned her, that he had seen her or been in touch with
her when he first came back, maybe even stayed with her for a week or
two when he first came back, I don't remember. My wife later told me
that Marina couldn't get along with my mother.

Mr. JENNER. Marina told your wife that she couldn't get along with your
mother?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I think it was Vada told my wife that Marina
couldn't. I think she rather observed this rather than being told by
Marina.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. PIC. That the two of them, not that they didn't get along, but that
Marina disliked her.

Mr. JENNER. Is that the last time you saw your brother Lee?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir, in the course of that Thanksgiving Day, my brother
Robert offered to drive him back to the bus station. Lee made a phone
call and it was my understanding that the people that he phoned were of
Russian descent, and that Marina often visited with them or talked with
them, so she could talk in her own native tongue, and that their boy,
who was attending, I believe, the University of Oklahoma----

Mr. JENNER. Paul Gregory?

Mr. PIC. Sir, I don't remember his name at all, because I was mad at
the time I was introduced to him.

Mr. JENNER. Introduced to whom?

Mr. PIC. This gentleman who picked him up.

Mr. JENNER. Was he a young man?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right, tell us the circumstances, tell us what led up
to this incident, and tell us all about the incident.

Mr. PIC. Well, they made the phone call, and Lee said that they would
be picked up by their friends, and I think sometime between 6 and 7
that night he came by. Now, my brother Robert, whenever he introduces
me to anyone always refers to me as his brother. Lee referred to me as
his half brother when he introduced me.

Mr. JENNER. On this occasion?

Mr. PIC. It was very pronounced. He wanted to let the man know I was
only his half brother. And this kind of peeved me a little bit. Because
we never mentioned the fact that we were half brothers.

Mr. JENNER. You never had that feeling?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was this the first time that your brother had ever
introduced you to anyone as his half brother? I am talking about your
brother Lee now.

Mr. PIC. I think possibly, sir, this is the first time he ever
introduced me to anyone.

Mr. JENNER. Was this the first time he had ever referred to you as your
half brother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. His half brother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Is that so?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that irritated you on this occasion?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. Right then and there I had the feeling that the
hostile feeling was still there. Up until this time it didn't show
itself, but I felt then, well, he still felt the same way.

Mr. JENNER. This young man from the University of Oklahoma, whose name,
by the way, was Gregory----

Mr. PIC. He was at the University of Oklahoma.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. I have said this three or four times, I wasn't certain, but
I am sure he was and I was introduced to him as Lee's half brother,
and the man was studying Russian at the school. His parents were from
Russia.

Mr. JENNER. He came alone, did he?

Mr. PIC. The car was parked out front, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Well, he was alone when he came in?

Mr. PIC. He was in the house alone.

Mr. JENNER. Was it night?

Mr. PIC. Yes; it was dark between 6 and 7 in November.

Mr. JENNER. Did you go out to the car?

Mr. PIC. No; I didn't. We stayed in the house.

Mr. JENNER. Did Robert go out to the car?

Mr. PIC. I don't remember, sir. I don't think so.

Mr. JENNER. Did Marina appear to be acquainted with this young man?

Mr. PIC. Yes; as soon as he walked in she started talking Russian to
him.

Mr. JENNER. Did he respond in Russian?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Lee spoke to him in Russian?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Except when he was introducing you to him he introduced you
in English as his half brother?

Mr. PIC. Well, Lee would speak to him part Russian, part English. He
was only there maybe a couple or 3 minutes. I had the impression that
this gentleman could speak Russian better than Lee.

Mr. JENNER. What gave you that impression?

Mr. PIC. Because Lee wouldn't converse fully with him in Russian
whereas him and Marina did converse fully in Russian.

Mr. JENNER. Any other impressions you got of this several hours visit
with your brother Lee?

Mr. PIC. Well, right before they left, sir; I told him that if he needs
any help or anything, to let me know. I told him I was unable to help
him financially but he is welcome to pay us a visit any time he wished,
stay with us, talk like that.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say?

Mr. PIC. He said OK. He told me to write to him, and in this book, sir,
which I had there he wrote his post office box address in Dallas.

Mr. JENNER. We will give that little book, to which you make reference,
John Pic Exhibit No. 60.

(The document referred to was marked John Pic Exhibit No. 60 for
identification.)

Mr. JENNER. I have John Pic Exhibit No. 60 in my hand. What is this?

Mr. PIC. A black memo book, I guess.

Mr. JENNER. Of yours?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I had it in my car at the time. Whenever I travel I
keep a little book with my mileage on it and so forth.

Mr. JENNER. I notice that the fist ruled page of this book on which
there appear some figures, the letter "B" and then there are some
handwritings which appears to be Russian. I show that to you.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. In whose handwriting is that?

Mr. PIC. That is in the handwriting of Marina Oswald, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What was the occasion of her writing in this book?

Mr. PIC. Only part of this, sir, is in the handwriting of Marina
Oswald. This right here [indicating].

Mr. JENNER. That is the word beginning with the letter, it looks like
the letter "N" or "M" and the word right below that beginning with the
letter "D," and a word right below that beginning, it looks like a
capital "H"?

Mr. PIC. That is right, sir. The other ones are in my handwriting.

Mr. JENNER. The others are all figures?

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. What was the occasion of her writing that on the page?

Mr. PIC. She being a pharmacist, and me being in the medical field,
we tried to communicate with each other just to make small talk with
medical terminology, metric system and so forth, just some way to kill
time with each other she and I seemed to be able to do this to some
degree.

Mr. JENNER. That is to communicate?

Mr. PIC. Yes; as long as we stuck within the pharmacy and medical field.

Mr. JENNER. Did she know some English terms in the pharmacy, medical
field?

Mr. PIC. She used Latin phrases, some of which were familiar to me.

Mr. JENNER. Just what was that writing, some medical terms?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I think these are names of drugs she was writing down. I
wouldn't know.

Mr. JENNER. There is a large letter "B" on that page. How did that get
on there?

Mr. PIC. I don't know, sir. I don't know, sir. I wouldn't venture a
guess whose handwriting it is.

Mr. JENNER. There is a square to the left of the handwriting in
Russian, what does that signify?

Mr. PIC. This was placed there by the Secret Service, in San Antonio,
sir, to identify the handwritings in this book, the square being the
handwriting of Marina Oswald, the parentheses being the handwriting of
myself and the mark with the circle being the handwriting of Lee Harvey
Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. So that wherever throughout that book a zero appears that
is the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Wherever the parentheses mark appears that is your
handwriting?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And wherever the square appears that is Marina's
handwriting?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Turn the page over. On the reverse side of that page that
is all your handwriting?

Mr. PIC. Except this up here, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The reverse side of the previous page.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that is my handwriting.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, the front side of the next page which has
the letter "A" printed on it, in the upper right-hand corner. Is that
in your handwriting?

Mr. PIC. Everything except this top portion, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The top portion?

Mr. PIC. Starting with liquid measure would be my handwriting.

Mr. JENNER. And then there is something above that?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Whose handwriting is that?

Mr. PIC. I believe that to be Marina Oswald's, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Everything below that is yours?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. The reverse side of that page, that is the
reverse side of the "A" page is in whose handwriting?

Mr. PIC. My handwriting, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Then the page opposite that?

Mr. PIC. That is in my handwriting, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The reverse side of that page is blank. Then the face
of the next page is some figures and the words "Highway start, Fort
Worth," and "highway" again, those are all in whose handwriting?

Mr. PIC. My handwriting, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Then the series of pages are blank, and the first writing
we see thereafter is on the "C" page, some letters and a figure. Whose
handwriting is that?

Mr. PIC. That is mine, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The next handwriting appears on the last ruled page. Whose
handwriting is that?

Mr. PIC. That is the handwriting of my wife, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All of it?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; she loves to write her name.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Then on the next to the last page in the book
which is a plain white page, appears P.O. Box 2195, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. PIC. That is the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And on the opposite page, which is the inside of the back
cover----

Mr. PIC. This is the identifying mark in the hand of Secret Service
Agent Ben A. Vidles, in San Antonio, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. This book is in the same condition now as it was?

Mr. PIC. When I gave it to the Secret Service.

Mr. JENNER. When you gave it to the Secret Service.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Plus the identifying marks you have described?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I offer in evidence a document, memorandum book now marked
as "John Pic Exhibit No. 60."

(The document heretofore marked for identification as John Pic Exhibit
No. 60 was received in evidence.)

Mr. JENNER. Did you thereafter prior to November 22, up to but prior to
November 22, 1963, hear anything about your brother?

Mr. PIC. The day or two after they left Robert and I went fishing.
While we were in the boat there was Robert, myself, and my oldest boy,
and at this time I asked him about Lee, I asked him if he considered
or thought that Lee was a little on the pink side and just how he was
getting along. Robert informed me that he had had seen FBI agents once
in awhile who said Lee was doing pretty good and that there was nothing
to worry about. And all reports that he had had were favorable towards
Lee.

Mr. JENNER. Robert did tell you that the FBI had checked with him?

Mr. PIC. He had seen an agent now and then, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He didn't elaborate as to whether the FBI had come to visit
him or whether he had merely run into some FBI agent?

Mr. PIC. I had the impression that they had visited him where he
worked, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you hear anything else about your brother from that
occasion up to but not including November 22, 1963?

Mr. PIC. Well, other information I gathered from my talks with Robert
in those few days was that Lee and Marina made the trip to see them in
Fort Worth fairly regular, to have dinner, things like this. It seems
that Vada and Marina were at one time, I was told, talking----

Mr. JENNER. By whom?

Mr. PIC. By Vada, Marina was trying to make a point about her wedding
ring being she couldn't speak English, Vada got the impression that
Marina had been married before.

Mr. JENNER. That Marina had been married before?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this is the only thing she could gather from Marina
flashing her wedding ring and talking about this. The four of us were
present, Robert, myself, and the two wives. But this was done over
coffee.

Mr. JENNER. This was after Lee and Marina had left?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; this was after they had left.

Mr. JENNER. What did Robert say on that subject, if anything?

Mr. PIC. Nothing. That he didn't think she had been married before.

Mr. JENNER. Did you visit your brother Robert, and did he visit you
subsequent to that occasion on Thanksgiving up to but not including
November 22, 1963?

Mr. PIC. A couple or 3 days prior to Christmas of 1962, Robert and his
family returned the visit to our home in San Antonio, sir. I asked
Robert this time if he had seen or heard from Lee since we had last
seen him and he told me, no.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any comment on that subject that he had not heard
from Lee up to that time?

Mr. PIC. It was really only a matter of 3 or 4 weeks at the most, sir.

Mr. JENNER. So it didn't occasion any surprise on your part?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Were you given any other information by Robert with respect
to Lee?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; not that I recall.

Mr. JENNER. Did you see Robert again subsequent to this pre-Christmas
Party 1962?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And up to but not including November 22, 1963?

Mr. PIC. I still haven't seen him since Christmas 1962.

Mr. JENNER. Have you corresponded?

Mr. PIC. We have written a few letters, and I was permitted to make a
phone call to him right after the assassination.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say in the course of that conversation? What
did you say?

Mr. PIC. This was--I was permitted to make the phone call after Lee's
murder. The Secret Service said I could contact Robert. He had called
where I worked and left a number. I contacted the Secret Service. They
told me go ahead and call this number, call them back and tell them the
gist of the conversation.

I called him up at this number. Someone answered the phone and I asked
for Robert and they called him to the phone. He told me that he and
his--told me his wife and children were at the farm with her folks, I
believe that is what he told me. That he was--he couldn't tell me where
he was but he was in Arlington, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. Robert was?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; under custody of the Secret Service.

Mr. JENNER. What day of the week was this?

Mr. PIC. This was Sunday, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The day of the death of your brother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The 24th of November 1963?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What else was said?

Mr. PIC. He told me that some local business people would make
arrangements for the funeral and there would be no expense to him. I
told him I was sorry it happened and everything.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about having seen your brother at the
Dallas City Police Station prior to this telephone conversation?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he didn't.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion in this telephone conversation
about the assassination of President Kennedy?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; there wasn't.

Mr. JENNER. About the possible involvement of your brother in that
connection?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; there wasn't.

Mr. JENNER. I take it, then, it was confined largely, if not
exclusively, to the death of your brother?

Mr. PIC. The conversation was just about as I related it, sir. It was
mostly confined to the death of Lee.

Mr. JENNER. And his burial?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you attend the funeral services?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I was not permitted. In fact, the Secret Service
did not let me write Robert for, I think, 7 to 8 days after the
assassination. At that time they granted me permission to freely
correspond with him.

Mr. JENNER. And you did so?

Mr. PIC. I think we have written about two, three letters back and
forth. I am the one who fails to write. He never fails to write.

Mr. JENNER. The subject matter of these letters involved Lee; any of
them?

Mr. PIC. I think the very first one I got concerned the welfare of his
family. They were out at the farm. That his company treated him very
good about all the time lost. That Marina asked about us and how we
were getting along. In my return letter to him I told him nobody had
bothered us and we were getting along just fine. He informed me that he
was--I suggested if they could, to come down and stay with us awhile.
We had just purchased a new house, we had the room, and he wrote back
and told me that because he had missed all the time because of the
incidents he was unable to get any more time from his company without
losing his job.

Mr. JENNER. Have you seen Marina in the meantime?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The last time you saw her, I take it, then, was
Thanksgiving Day 1962?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Has there been any correspondence between you?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Has there been any correspondence that was indirect in any
fashion?

Mr. PIC. My last letter I received from Robert was right after he
appeared here. He mentioned that Marina often asked about my wife
and I. Other than this, there has been no mention. He has mentioned
about the grave being desecrated, and some information concerning the
gravesite of Lee.

Mr. JENNER. Before I return to some specifics, is there anything else
that has occurred to you in your reflection on this matter that you
would like to mention?

Mr. PIC. The actual assassination, that time period or what, sir?

Mr. JENNER. Well, anything you think that might be relevant to the
Commission's investigation as to the circumstances surrounding the
assassination of President Kennedy, any persons involved therein, the
subsequent death of your brother.

Mr. PIC. Most of the information that I have seen and heard has been
all new to me, like his escapades in New Orleans, passing out the
leaflets and his radio program.

Mr. JENNER. Those incidents, by the way, were unknown to you until
after the assassination, I take it?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I assure you if I had known he was doing his
escapades again I would have went to the proper authorities about it.

Mr. JENNER. I show you an exhibit, a series of exhibits, first
Commission Exhibit No. 281 and Exhibit No. 282 being some spread pages
of an issue of Life magazine of February 21, 1964. I direct your
attention first to the lower left-hand spread at the bottom of the
page. Do you recognize the area shown there?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you see somebody in that picture that appears to be your
brother?

Mr. PIC. This one here with the arrow.

Mr. JENNER. The one that has the printed arrow?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you recognize that as your brother?

Mr. PIC. Because they say so, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Please, I don't want you to say----

Mr. PIC. No; I couldn't recognize that.

Mr. JENNER. Because this magazine says that it is.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I couldn't recognize him from that picture.

Mr. JENNER. You don't recognize anybody else in the picture after
studying it that appears to be your brother? When I say your brother
now, I am talking about Lee.

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. In the upper portion there are a series of photographs
spread from left-hand page across to the right-hand page. Take those on
the left which appears to be a photograph of three young men. Do you
recognize the persons shown in that photograph?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I recognize this photograph, the people from left to
right being Robert Oswald, the center one being Lee Oswald, and the
third one being myself. This picture was taken at the house in Dallas
when we returned from New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. You mean from--when you came from New Orleans after being
at the Bethlehem Orphanage Home?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you went to Dallas?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It was taken in Dallas at or about that time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The next one is prominent; in front is a picture of a young
boy. There is a partially shown girl and apparently another boy with a
striped shirt in the background. Do you recognize that picture?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any impression as to when and where that was
taken?

Mr. PIC. Just looking at the picture, I would guess first, second
grade, maybe. I would have to guess at it.

Mr. JENNER. Then there is one immediately to the right of that, a
young man in the foreground sitting on the floor, with his knees,
legs crossed, and his arms also crossed. There are some other people
apparently in the background.

Mr. PIC. I recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. Does anything about the picture enable you to identify as
to where that was taken?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Then to the right there is a picture of two young men, the
upper portion of the--one young man at the bottom and then apparently a
young man standing up in back of that person. Do you recognize either
of those young people?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I recognize Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. Is he the one to which the black arrow is pointing?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing
in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do
you recognize that?

Mr. PIC. Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee
Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you
recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Commission Exhibit No. 284--do you recognize anybody in
that picture that appears to be Lee Oswald?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. There is a young fellow in the foreground--everybody else
is facing the other way. He is in a pantomime, or grimace. Do you
recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; looking at that picture--and I have looked at it
several times--that looks more like Robert than it does Lee, to my
recollection.

Mr. JENNER. All right. On Exhibit No. 286, the lower right-hand corner,
there is another picture. Do you recognize that as your brother Lee in
that picture?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; that is about how he looked when I seen him in 1962,
his profile.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recognize the person, the lady to the right who is
pointing her finger at him?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I don't.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 287 is two figures, taking them from top to
bottom and in the lower right-hand corner, do you recognize those?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I don't.

Mr. JENNER. Neither one of them?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. The lower one appears to me to look like Robert
rather than Lee. The upper one, unless they tell me that, I would never
guess that that would be Lee, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Exhibit No. 288, there is in the lower left-hand
corner, there is a reproduction of a service card and a reproduction,
also, of a photograph with the head of a man. Do you recognize that?

Mr. PIC. That looks to me approximately how Lee Oswald looked when I
seen him Thanksgiving 1962.

Mr. JENNER. Directing your attention to Exhibit, Commission Exhibit No.
289, do you recognize any of the servicemen shown in that picture as
your brother Lee?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I do not recognize them.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 290, the lower left-hand corner there is a
photograph of a young lady and a young man. Do you recognize either of
those persons?

Mr. PIC. He appears to me as Lee Harvey Oswald in 1962 when I seen him.

Mr. JENNER. And the lady?

Mr. PIC. She is his wife, Marina, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Commission Exhibit No. 291, at the bottom of the page,
there is a picture of a young man handing out a leaflet, and another
man to the left of him who is reaching out for it. Do you recognize the
young man handing out the leaflet?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I would be unable to recognize him.

Mr. JENNER. As to whether he was your brother?

Mr. PIC. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 292, in the upper right-hand corner, is a
picture of a lady, a young lady with a child. Do you recognize either
of those persons?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I recognize Marina Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. And the baby?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I couldn't recognize the baby.

Mr. JENNER. Below that is a picture purporting to be that of your
brother with a pistol on his right hip, and with a firearm, a rifle
in his left hand holding up what appear to be some leaflets. Do you
recognize that as your brother Lee?

Mr. PIC. That is how he looked to me in 1962 when I seen him, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is a duplicate of the picture on the cover. You have
produced for us a series of letters from your mother to yourself, from
your brother Lee to yourself, and from your brother Robert to yourself
which have been marked John Pic Exhibits Nos. 6 through 47, inclusive.

Did you assist Mr. Ely, in the preparation of this list of exhibits?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I arranged the stacks. He took it from the stacks I
arranged previously.

Mr. JENNER. For the purpose of the record, then, John Pic Exhibit No. 6
is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic, postmarked May 8, 1950,
and its accompanying envelope as John Pic Exhibit No. 6-A. John Pic
Exhibit No. 7 is a letter from your mother to you, postmarked May 23,
1950, or the envelope is so postmarked. Its accompanying envelope being
marked John Pic Exhibit No. 7-A. John Pic Exhibit No. 8, a letter from
Marguerite Oswald to John Pic enclosed in envelope, Exhibit No. 8-A,
postmarked at Fort Worth, May 24, 1950.

By the way, Exhibit No. 6-A is postmarked Fort Worth. All of these
exhibits until I indicate otherwise from here on are marked with a
return address to M. Oswald, 9048 Ewing, Fort Worth, Tex.

Mr. PIC. 7408.

Mr. JENNER. What did I say? 7408; that is correct. You are right.

Exhibit No. 9 is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic,
accompanying envelope is Exhibit No. 9-A postmarked June 9, 1950.

Exhibit No. 10 and its reverse side, which is marked Exhibit No. 10-B,
is a letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to John Pic enclosed in envelope
marked John Pic Exhibit No. 10-A, postmarked at Fort Worth, Tex., on
August 23, 1950. This envelope has no return address on it.

Exhibit No. 11 is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic in an
envelope postmarked August 15, 1950, marked Exhibit No. 11-A.

Exhibit No. 12 is a letter from Marguerite to John Pic enclosed in
envelope postmarked November 6, 1950, and identified as John Pic
Exhibit No. 12-A.

The next is John Pic Exhibit No. 13, a letter from Marguerite Oswald
to John Pic enclosed in envelope postmarked December 13, 1950, the
envelope being marked John Pic Exhibit No. 13-A. This does have the
return address Lee Oswald, 7408 Ewing, Fort Worth, Tex.

The next is a short longhand note on a small sheet marked John Pic
Exhibit No. 14 which is undated, Lee Harvey Oswald to John Pic, which
was enclosed with Exhibit No. 13.

The next is a card, Christmas card, marked John Pic Exhibit No. 15,
inside cover of which in longhand says, "Dear Pic," and then there is
in longhand and pencil "I sure am sorry that you can't come home for
Christmas so I am sending you this fruitcake. Merry Christmas"--spelled
Mary--"from Lee."

The next is John Pic No. 16, a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John
Pic enclosed in envelope marked Pic Exhibit No. 16-A and postmarked in
Fort Worth, April 16, 1951, with the usual return address.

Exhibit No. 17 is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic enclosed
in envelope postmarked at Fort Worth on April 23, 1951. That envelope
is marked John Pic Exhibit No. 17-A. The previous envelope in which
Exhibit No. 16 was enclosed was marked Exhibit No. 16-A. I will say for
the record in each instance where there is a letter accompanied by an
envelope, the envelope is marked with a letter "A" but with the same
number as the letter.

Exhibit No. 18 is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic enclosed
in an envelope marked Exhibit No. 18-A, postmarked at Fort Worth, May
22, 1951.

The next is Exhibit No. 19, a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic
enclosed in an envelope marked Exhibit No. 19-A, postmarked at Fort
Worth on June 18, 1951.

Exhibit No. 20 is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic and
Exhibit No. 20-B is a birthday card from Marguerite. Both are enclosed
in an envelope marked John Pic Exhibit No. 20-A, postmarked at Fort
Worth, Tex., June 14, 1952, bearing the usual return address.

Exhibit No. 21 is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic enclosed
in an envelope marked Pic Exhibit No. 21-A, postmarked Fort Worth, July
14, 1952, with the usual return address.

The next is a letter without an envelope which is marked John Pic
Exhibit No. 22. The letter is dated May 10, 1954.

The Exhibit No. 23 is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic
enclosed is an envelope, Exhibit No. 23-A, postmarked in New Orleans on
June 14, 1954, containing the return address, M. Oswald, 1454 St. Mary,
New Orleans, La.

The next is Exhibit No. 24; it is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to
John Pic enclosed in an envelope postmarked at New Orleans, October 14,
1954, which in turn is marked John Pic Exhibit No. 24-A. It contains
the return address, M. Oswald, 126 Exchange, New Orleans, La. If I
neglected to do so, Exhibit No. 22 is the letter from Marguerite Oswald
to John Pic.

Exhibit No. 25 also is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic
enclosed in an envelope marked Exhibit No. 25-A, postmarked at New
Orleans, La., on November 12, 1954, containing return address, M.
Oswald, 126 Exchange, New Orleans, La.

Exhibit No. 26 is a letter from Marguerite Oswald to John Pic enclosed
in an envelope marked Exhibit No. 26-A, postmarked at New Orleans, La.,
on November 11, 1954, return address, Mrs. M. Oswald, 126 Exchange, New
Orleans, La. Mr. Pic, are Exhibits Nos. 6 and 6-A, 7 and 7-A, 8 and
8-A, 9 and 9-A, 10 and 10-A, 11 and 11-A--excuse me, strike out that 10
and 10-A--11 and 11-A, 12 and 12-A, 16 and 16-A, 17 and 17-A, 18 and
18-A, 19 and 19-A, 20 and 20-A, 21 and 21-A, 22, 23 and 23-A, 24 and
24-A, 25 and 25-A, 26 and 26-A, all in the handwriting of your mother
Marguerite Oswald?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And were those envelopes addressed to you at various places
you were then, that is as of the time they were postmarked received by
you at or about the postmarked dates or shortly thereafter which each
envelope bears?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. There is one exhibit that doesn't have an envelope. Was
that letter received by you shortly after the date it bears?

Mr. PIC. You refer to Exhibit No. 22, sir?

Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir.

Mr. PIC. To the best of my knowledge; yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. These are all, they all consist of correspondence from your
mother to you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And they happen to be correspondence which you have
retained over the years?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Except for the exhibit marks on those, they are in the same
condition now as they were at the time you received them and opened
them in the case of the envelopes?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that the letters are in the condition they were at the
time you read them?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Go back to Pic Exhibit No. 10, in whose handwriting is that
exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 10, sir, is in the handwriting of--there is
Exhibits Nos. 10, 10-A, and 10-B.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 10, I am referring to.

Mr. PIC. They are both in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibits Nos. 10 and 10-A; correct?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; Exhibits Nos. 10, 10-A, and 10-B. Exhibit No. 10 is
the insert in envelope Exhibit No. 10-A.

Mr. JENNER. Then look at Exhibits Nos. 13 and 13-A.

Mr. PIC. They are marked Exhibits Nos. 13 and 13-A, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. The contents are marked Exhibit No. 13.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. In whose handwriting is the envelope?

Mr. PIC. Lee Harvey Oswald's.

Mr. JENNER. And whose handwriting is that which appears in the inside
of that card?

Mr. PIC. My mother's, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Is there any handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald on that card?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The card was enclosed, was it in the exhibit marked John
Pic No. 13-A?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Turn to Exhibit No. 14. That is a note you received from
your brother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Is that in his handwriting?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It is undated.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have the envelope in which that was enclosed?

Mr. PIC. Sir, it may be Exhibit No. 13-A, I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. It may have been enclosed in Exhibit No. 13-A?

Mr. PIC. It may have been enclosed in Exhibit No. 10-A, I don't know,
sir.

Mr. JENNER. In any event, it is in the handwriting of your brother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you received it in due course some time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. On or about the holiday period----

Mr. PIC. I would guess that Exhibit No. 15 goes in envelope Exhibit No.
13-A.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Would you put them in there?

Mr. PIC. And the date on envelope Exhibit No. 13-A is 13 December, and
this is a Christmas card from Lee, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That Christmas card on the inside is the handwriting of
your mother, however?

Mr. PIC. No, sir. Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, the exhibit marked John Pic No. 14, do you
have a recollection as to the envelope in which that was enclosed?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have a recollection as to approximately when you
received it, that is John Pic Exhibit No. 14?

Mr. PIC. I would speculate and say that Exhibit No. 10 goes in envelope
Exhibit No. 10-A, and that Exhibit No. 14 either came some little
period of time before or after the contents in envelope Exhibit No.
10-A.

Mr. JENNER. That is while you were away at military school?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; this is when I am in the Coast Guard.

Mr. JENNER. All right. All those exhibits I have now identified, that
is after I identified your mother's letters, are in the handwriting of
Lee Oswald?

Mr. PIC. All except Exhibit No. 13, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And Exhibit No. 13 is in the handwriting of your mother?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It appears to be and is a Christmas card?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. From its contents are you able to tell us approximately
when you received that?

Mr. PIC. It would be, I would say sometime after Christmas of 1950, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Would you put all those exhibits back in order?

Mr. PIC. What belongs with what I think.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. Exhibits Nos. 13-A and 15 here, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You have already told us of Exhibits No. 13-A belonging
with Exhibit No. 15. You have also produced for us correspondence that
you happen still to have in your possession from your brother Robert
Oswald, have you not?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I place that correspondence before you and ask you to
follow me as I place the exhibit numbers in the record. Exhibit No. 27
is a letter from Robert to you.

Mr. PIC. They are marked all with "B's."

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 27-B is a letter from your brother Robert to
you enclosed in an envelope marked Exhibit No. 27-A, postmarked October
1, 1952?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. From where?

Mr. PIC. U.S. Navy 14016, sir. Unit 1.

Mr. JENNER. And to you at?

Mr. PIC. At 325 East 92d Street, New York City, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 28-B is the contents of Exhibit No. 28-A, the
contents consisting of a letter from your brother Robert to you, the
envelope is postmarked June 9, 1954.

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And it is addressed to you where?

Mr. PIC. U.S. Coast Guard Station, Staten Island, N.Y.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Exhibit No. 29-B is the contents of the envelope
marked Exhibit No. 29-A, the contents consisting of a letter from your
brother Robert to you, and the envelope being postmarked June 19, 1954.

Mr. PIC. Plus a picture.

Mr. JENNER. There is also enclosed in that envelope a picture?

Mr. PIC. That is right, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Which is marked----

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 29-C.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 29-C. The picture is a picture of whom?

Mr. PIC. Two what appear to be Marines, sir; the one on the left being
Robert Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. May I see it, please, sir? Do you know the other Marine?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I do not.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 30-A is an envelope postmarked December 13,
1954, its contents being a letter marked Exhibit No. 30-B, being a
letter from your brother Robert to you.

Mr. PIC. Being a Christmas card, sir; with a letter written on the
Christmas card.

Mr. JENNER. On the inside?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And some inscription, also, under the Christmas greetings?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Now, are those exhibits all in the handwriting, except for
the photograph, of course, in the handwriting of your brother Robert?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; to my best of my knowledge.

Mr. JENNER. Did you receive those exhibits, the envelopes, and the
contents in due course after they were posted?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you have retained them in your possession since that
time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Have you also produced for us some additional
correspondence between your mother and yourself?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Being exclusively letters from her to you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. They being in the following series: Exhibit No. 31-A, an
envelope addressed to you postmarked June 3, 1950----

Mr. PIC. Fort Worth, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. Fort Worth, Tex. What is the return address?

Mr. PIC. M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing, Fort Worth, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. And the contents consisting of a letter from your mother to
you?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that is marked Exhibit No. 31-B?

Mr. PIC. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. The next envelope and letter, the envelope is marked
Exhibit No. 32-A. Is it postmarked?

Mr. PIC. Partial postmark, sir.

Mr. JENNER. How much of it can you read?

Mr. PIC. Texas 1950, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Its contents marked?

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 32-B, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is a letter from your mother to you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Enclosed with the envelope we have identified?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The next exhibit is what?

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 33-A, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Postmarked?

Mr. PIC. Fort Worth, August 23, 1950.

Mr. JENNER. What return address?

Mr. PIC. M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing, Fort Worth, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. The contents have been marked?

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 33-B, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The letter from your mother to you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Enclosed in that envelope?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Is just a letter dated Exhibit No. 34.

Mr. PIC. Is just a letter marked Exhibit No. 34.

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Is it dated?

Mr. PIC. The only mention is the word Saturday, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It is undated?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It is in the handwriting of your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You received it in due course?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Some time or other?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. But you did not retain the envelope?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Can you tell from its content approximately when you
received it? Was it after you entered the Coast Guard?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; definitely after I entered the Coast Guard, in fact
it mentions the Korean war, so it was after the onset of the Korean war.

Mr. JENNER. Was it received subsequently to the letter and envelope,
the envelope being postmarked August 23, 1950, being the previous
exhibit?

Mr. PIC. I wouldn't know, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. The next exhibit.

Mr. PIC. Envelope Exhibit No. 35-A, sir, postmarked Fort Worth, Tex.;
return address, M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing, Fort Worth, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. What is the postmark date?

Mr. PIC. September 22, 1950.

Mr. JENNER. Contents marked?

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 35-B, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Being a letter from your mother to you?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 36-A bearing the postmark 27 September 1950,
return address, M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing Street, Fort Worth, Tex.

Mr. JENNER. And postmarked at Fort Worth?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; postmarked at Fort Worth.

Mr. JENNER. Its contents marked--what is the exhibit number on the
contents?

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 36-B, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Then the next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. The next Exhibit No. 37-A, postmarked Fort Worth, Tex.,
December 28, 1950, no return address.

Mr. JENNER. The contents?

Mr. PIC. Christmas card marked Exhibit No. 37-B with a short note.

Mr. JENNER. In the handwriting of your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Envelope Exhibit No. 38-A, postmarked Fort Worth, Tex.,
January 19, 1951, return address, M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing, Fort Worth,
Tex. Contents of envelope marked Exhibit No. 38-B containing a letter
from my mother to myself.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Envelope Exhibit No. 39-A postmarked Fort Worth Tex., April 6,
1951. The only thing made out on the return address is "M.O. 7408 Fort
Worth, Texas."

Mr. JENNER. Contents?

Mr. PIC. Contents Exhibit No. 39-B, a letter from my mother to myself,
sir.

Mr. JENNER. Next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Envelope marked Exhibit No. 40-A, postmarked Fort Worth, Tex.,
May 2, 1951, return address, M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing, contents Exhibit
No. 40-B letter from my mother to myself, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Envelope marked Exhibit No. 41-A postmarked Fort Worth, Tex.,
7 May 1951, return address 7408, Mrs. M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing, Fort
Worth, Tex., contents letter marked Exhibit No. 41-B, a letter from my
mother to myself, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. A letter, envelope marked Exhibit No. 42-A postmarked Fort
Worth, Tex., June 4, 1951, return address M. Oswald 7408 Ewing, Fort
Worth, Tex., contents marked Exhibit No. 42-B, letter from my mother to
myself, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Envelope marked Exhibit No. 43-A, postmarked Fort Worth, Tex.,
June 13, 1951, return address M. Oswald 7408 Ewing, Fort Worth, Tex.,
contents marked Exhibit No. 43-B, a letter from my mother to myself,
sir.

Mr. JENNER. Next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Envelope marked Exhibit No. 44-A postmarked Fort Worth, Tex.,
July 13, 1951, return address M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing, Fort Worth, Tex.,
contents marked Exhibit No. 44-B, a letter from my mother to myself,
sir.

Mr. JENNER. Next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. An envelope marked Exhibit No. 45-A, postmarked Fort Worth,
Tex., February 8, 1952, return address M. Oswald 7408 Ewing, Fort
Worth, Tex. Contents Exhibit No. 45-B, a letter from my mother to
myself, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Next exhibit?

Mr. PIC. Envelope marked Exhibit No. 46-A, postmarked Fort Worth, Tex.,
May 8, 1952, M. Oswald, 7408 Ewing, Fort Worth, Tex., contents marked
Exhibit No. 46-B, letter from my mother to myself.

Mr. JENNER. The last of the series?

Mr. PIC. An envelope marked Exhibit No. 47-A, postmarked Fort Worth,
Tex., dated 5th of March 1952, return address M. Oswald 7408 Ewing,
Fort Worth, Tex. Contents marked Exhibit No. 47-A also. The letter from
my mother to myself.

Mr. JENNER. OK, that is a mistake then. We will change that marking to
Exhibit No. 47-B, which I am now doing.

The letters that have been identified with Exhibit No. 31-A and
concluding with Exhibit No. 47-B, are all in the handwriting of your
mother, are they not?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And it is correspondence which you received in due course
on or about the dates or shortly after the dates that the various
envelopes were postmarked?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you have retained them in your possession in the entire
time?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. There is an exhibit still before you marked John Pic
Exhibit No.----

Mr. PIC. Exhibit No. 59.

Mr. JENNER. What is that?

Mr. PIC. This appears to be a "shot" record of Lee Harvey Oswald
written in an unknown hand, which gives him a smallpox date of August
7, 1951.

Mr. JENNER. How did that come into your possession?

Mr. PIC. It was just laying in the box with all this other stuff, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I offer those exhibits now commencing with Exhibit No. 31-A
to and including Exhibits Nos. 47-B, plus 59, in evidence.

(The documents referred to were marked John Pic Exhibits Nos. 31-A to
47-B, inclusive, and Exhibit No. 59 for identification and received in
evidence.)

Mr. JENNER. Mr. Pic, we have made copies of all those exhibits and we
appreciate your bringing the originals, and you may take the originals
back with you to San Antonio. Those exhibits consisting of the
photographs of your brother which you brought, we will have duplicated
and returned to you in due course.

Mr. PIC. All right.

Mr. JENNER. Direct your attention, if you will, to Exhibit No. 9-A, an
envelope and its contents, Exhibit No. 9, this being a letter from Fort
Worth, June 9, 1950, to you at Brooklyn, N.Y.

There is an inside page reading, "Mother called in on and told some of
my problems." Do you find that?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Uncle Dutz wired $75. That is your uncle Charles Murret?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And then it reads, "And Lee was invited to spend a couple
of weeks, so I sent him on the train by himself. To what is your mother
referring in connection with her problems and the wiring of the $75 by
your uncle?

Mr. PIC. It appears to me, sir, that at this time period she was
between jobs. Further down she states she is starting on a new job
Monday.

Mr. JENNER. Does she refer to that job on the page that is numbered 3,
I believe, as McDonald Kitchens is the name?

Mr. PIC. She first refers to it on the one where it begins, "Mother
called in on".

Mr. JENNER. Now, the mother there mentioned is your mother, isn't it?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Then there is a page numbered 3?

Mr. PIC. That is right, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Which referred to McDonald's Kitchens as the name and what
they do is cook food for commercial use?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. "I will drive a station wagon and deliver the food, also."

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Is that a job she was about to obtain?

Mr. PIC. I can only assume from the letter, sir; I have no other
knowledge of that.

Mr. JENNER. She makes a reference on that page "Haven't sold the house
as yet but have a good prospect." Calling your attention to the date,
June 9, 1950, what house was that?

Mr. PIC. I am sure this refers to the little house in Benbrook, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It refers to people called DeLogans. Who are they?

Mr. PIC. I assume these people were renting the house from her, I don't
remember them.

Mr. JENNER. That was a duplex of some kind?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; that was this little L-shaped house.

Mr. JENNER. In all this correspondence, Sergeant, by and large your
mother very frequently, if not all the time, refers to her straitened
circumstances, need for funds, and references to you having sent money.
In your testimony you have referred to conversations with her on the
subject and she raised the subject to you. Was that something that was
pretty constantly in her mind all the time?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; it was.

Mr. JENNER. Did she talk about that subject at times when you were of
the opinion that she was not as straitened as she appears to report in
these letters?

Mr. PIC. Will you repeat that, please, sir?

Mr. JENNER. Would you read it, please, Mr. Reporter.

(The question, as recorded, was read by the reporter.)

Mr. PIC. I am sorry, sir; I don't understand your question.

Mr. JENNER. Were you of the opinion from time to time that on these
occasions when she talked about what appears to be that she was in
extremis with respect to finances when in fact she was not, she was
overstating this condition or status?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I believe she overstated it most of the time.

Mr. JENNER. Because there were purchases of houses, at least on the
installment plan, and she seemed to have capital to do that, did she
not?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; she could always buy and sell a house some way or
other.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression as to why she was doing this; to
impress you boys or was that just her fixation or personality trait?

Mr. PIC. It is my impression that she did it in order to make a profit
on every deal she got involved with.

Mr. JENNER. I am not thinking of a house sale as such. But that
question was more directed to her talking about her financial
circumstances.

Was she attempting to impress you boys that she was working herself
to the bone to support you and you should be more grateful than you
appeared to be, and that sort of thing?

Mr. PIC. That is practically verbatim, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Please; you say that is practically verbatim, you mean you
have uttered what was in her mind?

Mr. PIC. No; just about what she says. She said at those times.

Mr. JENNER. Were you under the impression that she was overstating in
that respect?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was that likewise the feeling of your brother Robert?

Mr. PIC. Yes, I am sure it was.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression as to whether your mother was
always sincere and straightforward with respect to that subject matter?

Mr. PIC. My opinion, sir; at the time was all she cared about was
getting hold of and making some money in some form or another. This is
her god, so to speak, was to get money. And to get as much out of me as
she could and as much out of Robert as she could.

Mr. JENNER. And as much out of anybody else as she could?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any--you talk about the difficulties with Mr.
Ekdahl. Do you recall any discussions between them with respect to any
dissatisfaction on your mother's part with funds that were given her by
Mr. Ekdahl?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; she always wanted more money out of him. That was
the basis of all the arguments.

Mr. JENNER. And was she complaining to him that he didn't give her
enough money?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was your mother an extravagant person money-wise?

Mr. PIC. I don't know what she did with the money, sir. She bought very
little as far as clothes and things. We didn't eat steak every day.
We didn't eat that good. In fact, when I joined the service in 1950,
I was 118 pounds, and my weight prior to that was usually about 130,
140. I think within a month or two after I joined the service I was up
to 145 and none of my uniforms fit me. I was--there is a picture of me
in the Pasqual High School thing, and I am very thin. People couldn't
recognize me from that picture. I lost a lot of weight working, and not
eating too good. I would come home and have to fix my own meals.

Mr. JENNER. Was your mother attentive in that respect? Did she go out
of her way to have meals ready for you boys when you returned to home
either after work or after school or otherwise?

Mr. PIC. If there was a majority eating there was usually something set
aside for the lesser, which was kept warm in the oven.

Mr. JENNER. You mean the member of the family who was absent at
mealtime she would save something for him?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you get the feeling, you and your brother, in due
course, that your mother's references to these financial needs at
times, at least when, to use the vernacular, she was crying wolf?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. These continued references by her to her financial needs,
did you think that had an effect on Lee as well as on yourself and your
brother?

Mr. PIC. It didn't affect me that much. I ignored most of them. If I
had money I sent it. If I didn't, that was it. Lee was brought up in
this atmosphere of constant money problems, and I am sure it had quite
an effect on him, and also Robert.

Mr. JENNER. In her letter enclosed in the envelope postmarked June 18,
1951----

Mr. PIC. What number is that, sir?

Mr. JENNER. That is Exhibits Nos. 19 and 19-A--she makes reference that
Robert has been saving his money since January to buy a car and "gives
me $15 a week and never spends a cent unless absolutely necessary (is
he tight) but he has saved $210 since the first of the year and is
hiding"----

Mr. PIC. Hitting.

Mr. JENNER. "For $400" and so on.

Mr. PIC. Before buying a car.

Mr. JENNER. "Won't loan me a penny, pays his room and board regularly.
He gets 2 weeks vacation with pay, I believe, will start in July."

Do you remember your mother attempting to borrow money from you?

Mr. PIC. When I went home on leave in 1950 with a hundred or so
dollars, like I mentioned before, she wanted to hold it, just about the
whole amount except for about $10 from me, so nothing would happen to
it, and I might get robbed or something, she felt. Whenever she could
she attempted to get a buck out of any of us.

Mr. JENNER. Did you get any of that money back?

Mr. PIC. I got it all back and subsequently when I left I gave her, I
think $50 or so.

Mr. JENNER. In that same letter she refers to, she said, "I only made
$92 last month and am just starting to get leads. I am back with the
same company."

To what company is she referring in that letter which is postmarked
June 18, 1951?

Mr. PIC. I don't know, sir. It sounds to me like it would be an
insurance company.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall your mother selling insurance?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I knew approximately at this time period she sold
insurance.

Mr. JENNER. There is a reference to Lee taking tap dancing lessons,
also, in that letter, that he is a good dancer, "with his voice it
would be a good thing to start dancing lessons and when he is a little
older take voice."

Mr. PIC. I think this statement here about this practically like
several other statements which are either direct or indirect were an
attempt to get me to donate some money to this cause or something
else. Of course this, to me, is a come-on for maybe next time I write
I will say, "Hurrah, hurrah, Lee is going to take tap dancing lessons"
and then she will write and say she can't afford it and to send a
little money to help him. She did these things. In fact, in some of
her letters she refers to it is my fault they are in trouble because I
stated I would help pay for the car and since I was in the service I
wasn't holding up my end of the bargain.

Mr. JENNER. What about that incident?

Mr. PIC. Sir, that is in the second group of letters.

Mr. JENNER. What about this particular incident you mentioned? What are
the facts about that?

Mr. PIC. Just what it states here. This is all I know, sir. What it
states in this letter.

Mr. JENNER. About the dancing and voice?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever hear of Lee, other than this letter of Lee
taking dancing lessons?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever hear otherwise of his taking dancing lessons
than in this letter?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did either you or Robert ever take dancing lessons or voice
lessons?

Mr. PIC. I think when we were very small and Mr. Oswald was still alive
we did, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Now, the other thing to which I referred, as you made
reference to something about making payments on a car. What was that
about?

Mr. PIC. That would be in that second group, sir. In the second group
is really the financial statements. Every one of them contained
something pertaining to her finances.

Mr. JENNER. The early enlistments of yourself and Robert and Lee--do
you think that had anything to do with your mother's persistent
references, allusions to finances?

Mr. PIC. I did not enlist as fast as the other boys. I waited a year
after I was of age. I am sure that prior to my enlistment, as a matter
of fact, I knew she mentioned when I do get in I should make out an
allotment to her and so forth.

Mr. JENNER. Do you think there was an incentive on the part of Lee and
Robert to enlist as soon as possible to get away from your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I do.

Mr. JENNER. Did you and your brother Robert have discussions on this
subject?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; we never discussed these things. It was just a
feeling it was always around. We knew these things without discussing
them.

Mr. JENNER. Did you live in an atmosphere in which your mother directly
or indirectly indicated to you that she thought she had been unfairly
dealt with in her life?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You had that very definite impression?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You had----

Mr. PIC. I did not have this impression. She related this to me, sir. I
didn't feel she had it any tougher than a lot of people walking around.

Mr. JENNER. That is what I am getting at, this was an impression she
was seeking to create.

Mr. PIC. That is right, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You felt she did not have it any tougher. She was creating
an impression that did not square with the facts?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. Every time she met anyone she would remind them she
was a widow with three children.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have an opinion also as to whether this atmosphere
in which Lee lived had an effect upon him and his personality?

Mr. PIC. I am sure it did, sir. Also, Lee slept with my mother until I
joined the service in 1950. This would make him approximately 10, well,
almost 11 years old.

Mr. JENNER. When you say slept with, you mean in the same bed?

Mr. PIC. In the same bed, sir.

Mr. JENNER. As far as you know or say when Lee came and stayed with you
a short while in 1952 did he likewise sleep with your mother?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he did not.

Mr. JENNER. He had reached a measure of independence by that time?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir; when I left and went into the service there was a
vacant bed in the house.

Mr. JENNER. And at that time was that literally the first time that Lee
had separate quarters for himself other than the period of time that
Mr. Ekdahl lived with you and the period of time when your stepfather
Lee Oswald was alive?

Mr. PIC. Lee wasn't born when Lee Oswald was alive, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is right. Well, then, except for the time Mr. Ekdahl
lived with you?

Mr. PIC. That is true, sir. That would make him about 10-1/2 years old.

Mr. JENNER. Up to the time he was 10-1/2 years old, why he roomed and
slept with his mother in the same bed?

Mr. PIC. I would like to interject here.

Mr. JENNER. Yes, I am seeking something of the personality of your
mother and the effect on you, had an effect on Robert, and probably a
more material effect on Lee, is that correct?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I am sure it did. When I reached 17, I was eligible for
the service, but I was really in no hurry, I wanted to finish my high
school education, and when I decided to join the Coast Guard--at that
time to join the Coast Guard you needed your parent's consent up until
the age of 21. I asked her for it and she hesitated and I told her if
she didn't give it to me I would join another branch where I didn't
need it and then I got it. I am sure that neither Robert nor Lee needed
their mother's consent to join the Marine Corps at the age of 17. I
know for the Coast Guard we did, sir, the Coast Guard was not a part of
the Department of Defense at that time.

Mr. JENNER. Directing your attention to Exhibits Nos. 21 and 21-A, the
second page of that letter, Exhibit No. 21, reads, "Robert left Friday
morning for San Diego. He joined the Marines and signed for 4 years.
I am glad he decided to enlist. He realized his mistake about getting
married, and"--would you read the rest of it?

Mr. PIC. "And probably having to go just the same."

Mr. JENNER. "And then probably having to go just the same." Is that the
incident in which your mother opposed your brother Robert's marriage to
the little crippled girl?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Turn to Exhibit No. 24. There is a reference there to a
lady, Ethel somebody at Holmes. Would you read that?

Mr. PIC. "Ethel Nunncy at Holmes asks about you."

Mr. JENNER. And that is--Holmes is a department store?

Mr. PIC. In New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. Who was Ethel Nunncy?

Mr. PIC. She was a friend of my mother's, sir, that I had known of
since I was a small--I was a baby.

Mr. JENNER. Sir, this Exchange Alley--did they have to live under these
conditions?

Mr. PIC. All I know is that they lived there. She thought they did.

Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 31-B which is a letter from your mother to you
postmarked at Fort Worth, June 3, 1950, reading "Dear John, your sense
of responsibility seems nil" or null.

Mr. PIC. Nil, null.

Mr. JENNER. N-u-l-l. "Remember it was you insisted I buy the car as you
planned to work at Consolidated. Well I have been in a jam financially
ever since you left." What is the next word?

Mr. PIC. "Kept waiting and robbing Peter to pay Paul."

Mr. JENNER. "Until you were"----

Mr. PIC. Kept waiting and robbing Peter to pay Paul until you were
finished with your boot training as your letters indicated you would
send a hundred fifty dollars and about fifty dollars a month."

Mr. JENNER. Had you so indicated?

Mr. PIC. I don't believe so, sir. I don't see how, I wasn't making but
$80 per month.

Mr. JENNER. What truth was there in her statement that it was you who
insisted that she buy the car?

Mr. PIC. Well, that old jalopy I have a picture of was falling apart
and before I went in the service she had a ride home from work and the
generator wouldn't generate, and the battery wouldn't battery and it
just kept cutting out, so we needed a new car.

Mr. JENNER. Was that particular car about which you have just
described--about which you were having trouble--was that the family
car or a car owned by you?

Mr. PIC. A family car, I never owned a car, sir, when I lived at home.

Mr. JENNER. I take it you had urged her to buy a new car to replace
that one?

Mr. PIC. We all wanted a new car, sir, because the other one wouldn't
run. She had to get it pushed every morning to get to work. She would
have us out in the street waving down people to help her get the car
pushed.

Further on, sir, "I wrote you and told you about a girl loaning me $50
on my ring. I lost the ring and wasn't able to pay it." Sir, I wouldn't
believe that. I am sure at that time I didn't. And the way she goes on
the next page, "Cox found out about me borrowing" and let her go. I
don't believe this.

Mr. JENNER. The next letter, Exhibit No. 32-B, and in an envelope
marked in 1950, it says "Dear John, Well, I have the house in Benbrook
up for sale." Could you read the name?

Mr. PIC. It appears to me to be J. Piner Powell Real Estate is handling
it. Do you want me to read on?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. PIC. "The problem is to find someone with enough cash as a loan
company won't make a new loan and I have about $2,600 in it. Nothing
but bad news. Up to date I am still not working." Read on, sir?

Mr. JENNER. That is about enough. Did your mother write you a letter
that had good news in it?

Mr. PIC. I never recall one, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Around your home was the atmosphere that, "We are poor
but we will get along?" as your mother sought to lead you boys to
accommodate yourselves to the circumstances that everything would turn
out all right eventually?

Mr. PIC. None of us really paid much attention to this, sir. I didn't,
and I am sure Robert didn't. I don't think Lee did because Robert and I
would probably talk and we didn't pay much attention to it.

Mr. JENNER. You heard it so often you just became inured to it,
hardened to it; is that it?

Mr. PIC. Well, we didn't believe it after the problems she put on.
Just like when my wife and I got married she sent a package containing
Revere Ware which I haven't received yet and she swears up and down she
sent it, and she has never gotten it in the return mail either. And I
know she never sent anything. When we would be home alone, before she
would return from work, we have a rather friendly atmosphere, but as
soon as she came home we all got into that depression rut again.

Mr. JENNER. Was your----

Mr. PIC. This is prior to my going in the service, sir.

Mr. JENNER. There were times that the atmosphere around your home was
depressing?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And was that due largely to your mother?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The things she said and the attitudes she assumed?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And while you and your brother got along well you boys were
not getting along well with your mother in that sense?

Mr. PIC. Robert and I and Lee, we had our fights among us, like all
brothers do. But we could handle ourselves and our own problems, but
the atmosphere just changed when she was around.

Mr. JENNER. Did your mother ever say anything about whether people
liked her or disliked her?

Mr. PIC. She didn't have to. She didn't have many friends and usually
the new friends she made she didn't keep very long.

Mr. JENNER. That was her history?

Mr. PIC. I remember every time we moved she always had fights with the
neighbors or something or another.

Mr. JENNER. Was she a person who was resentful of the status of others?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you boys were aware of that, were you?

Mr. PIC. I was aware of it. She always--I remember once when we lived
on Eighth Avenue, I believe was the place, the people named McLean
living next to us, of course he was an attorney and everything, and
they had some money, and my mother----

Mr. JENNER. What town was this?

Mr. PIC. This was Fort Worth, sir. My mother remarked to me once that
Mrs. McLean had said she went and played the slot machines and lost
$100 in it, and she raved and ranted about this for half an hour or an
hour about how this woman could go and waste $100 and what she could do
with it and everything. She resented the fact this woman lost her own
money.

Mr. JENNER. I haven't found a single letter yet, Sergeant, in which
your mother fails to mention the subject of money.

Mr. PIC. You may find a Christmas card, "Love, Mother," sir.

Mr. JENNER. A letter?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; I don't think you will. These are only part of
them. I threw out a whole bunch a couple of years ago. They were all
basically the same.

Mr. JENNER. Was your mother loving and affectionate toward you boys?

Mr. PIC. I would say for myself, sir, I wasn't to her.

Mr. JENNER. What is that?

Mr. PIC. I was not toward her.

Mr. JENNER. Why?

Mr. PIC. I had no motherly love feeling toward her. Like I say, I think
I first became resentful to her when she informed me I would not return
to the military school and from then my hostilities toward her grew.

Mr. JENNER. Well, up to that point, what had been your feeling toward
your mother?

Mr. PIC. We had never been in a very affectionate family, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is affectionate with respect to the boys toward your
mother?

Mr. PIC. That is right, sir; kissing her, and things like this. It
is my own opinion that she is out right now to make as much money as
she can on her relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald. That is the only
thing--I don't really believe she really believes he is innocent. I
think she is out to make money than if she has to say he is guilty. I
think she is a phony in the whole deal.

Also, I think you will find with myself, Robert and Lee, also, that we
didn't have these or don't have these feelings towards money that she
does. I mean I live on my base pay and I have for years, and Robert
makes the best what he can, and whenever we get together, we never
discuss money. The only time I seen Lee as an adult he didn't discuss
it, not to the extent that we were used to, we never felt this way.

Mr. JENNER. It is your information, is it, that your mother's first
marriage was to your father?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Her second, then, to Robert Lee Edward Oswald?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And her third to E. A. Ekdahl?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. So far as you know she has not been married otherwise than
those three occasions?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; Has she?

Mr. JENNER. We don't know, if she has we don't know anything about it.

Did your brother Lee on the occasion on Thanksgiving Day 1962 say
anything about whether he had had a hard time in Russia?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is a hard time in the sense of earning a living?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Or some other sense?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; earning a living.

Mr. JENNER. What do you recall he said in that connection?

Mr. PIC. That he made about $80 a month, and it wasn't the money so
much. It was the products were not available to him and also his wife
to get even with the money, and they consistently ate cabbage and he
was tired of cabbage, and he struck me he was not complaining about
the money but the availability of food.

Mr. JENNER. Is it your impression that he had become disenchanted with
Russia?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I got this impression.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever hear him say anything while you were boys
in which he expressed dissatisfaction with the United States or its
Government?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He made no comment on that subject when you saw him on
Thanksgiving Day 1962?

Mr. PIC. I think his only bitter feelings that I recollect was his
dishonorable discharge from the Marine Corps. This was the only bitter
feelings he reported to me in anyway.

Mr. JENNER. I would like to have you tell us what he said as--did he
return to that subject repeatedly? What leads you now to conclude or
state by way of conclusion that he was bitter about that?

Mr. PIC. I think the idea of driving came up, the talk about
automobiles. I also think that he made the statement----

Mr. JENNER. When you say that is your present recollection?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. PIC. I also think that he made the statement that he----

Mr. JENNER. Here, again, you mean to the best of your recollection?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; to the best of my knowledge, that he made the
statement he wasn't driving because of this dishonorable discharge he
received. He was unable to obtain a driver's license. Then he told
me he was attempting to get this changed, and he had written several
letters to the Secretary of the Navy about getting it changed.

Mr. JENNER. Did he mention the then Governor Connally in that
connection?

Mr. PIC. I believe he did, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Governor Connally was not then Secretary of the Navy. Did
he express any resentment toward Governor Connally?

Mr. PIC. I think when he explained it to me----

Mr. JENNER. Please, you have said again "I think."

Mr. PIC. To the best of my recollection, sir, when he mentioned to
me that he had written to get it changed, Governor Connally was the
Secretary of the Navy. He did mention the name Connally.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have any feeling or get the impression that he
was bitter toward Governor Connally as a person? He was not, then, of
course----

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Secretary of the Navy.

Mr. PIC. No, sir; just the fact that the man had the job and he was the
man he had written it to.

Mr. JENNER. Was anything said about Fair Play for Cuba Committee on
this occasion?

Mr. PIC. There was no discussion about Cuba. I think this was right
after the Cuban crisis, and I think we may have talked about the
mobilization a little bit.

Mr. JENNER. Did he express any views on that subject?

Mr. PIC. No, sir; he didn't.

Mr. JENNER. Was President Kennedy discussed at anytime?

Mr. PIC. I don't recollect, sir.

He struck me on that meeting as really only having two purposes: One,
to straighten out the dishonorable discharge and the other one to pay
back the Government the money it had lent him to come back to the
United States.

Mr. JENNER. You were interested--Charlie Murret was a dentist and
a graduate of Louisiana State University. Joyce Murret married an
athletic coach and lives in Beaumont, Tex.?

Mr. PIC. Right.

Mr. JENNER. Gene Murret you have mentioned. He is a seminarian at
Mobile, Ala. Boogie Murret works for Squibb & Co. He is a graduate of
Loyola of New Orleans.

Mr. PIC. Someone mentioned, I don't know if it was Vada or my brother,
Robert----

Mr. JENNER. On this Thanksgiving Day occasion?

Mr. PIC. Yes; after they had left, that Marina's uncle, brother, some
relation, was an officer in the Russian Army. She had stated she had a
relative in the Soviet armed forces.

Mr. JENNER. It was your impression that either Vada had or Robert had?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Some of the witnesses have testified that Lee was quick
to anger as a boy. Do you remember anything about that? What is your
impression about that?

Mr. PIC. I don't remember, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was he a considerate young man?

Mr. PIC. I think towards Robert and myself he was, sir. Towards other
people, no.

Mr. JENNER. Was his attitude towards other people different from that
which he had toward you and Robert?

Mr. PIC. Yes; I believe so.

Mr. JENNER. In what respect--what did you notice about him in that
regard?

Mr. PIC. He would rather play with us than play with other children,
and he always wanted to go with us wherever we went. Whenever we had
a birthday or Christmas he would never forget us. I think he was very
considerate towards Robert and myself.

Mr. JENNER. From time to time we have been off the record and had some
discussions in discussing documents and other things. Do you recall
anything we discussed off the record that you think is pertinent here
that I have failed to place on the record?

Mr. PIC. I don't remember what has been off the record, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I will put it this way then: Is there anything you would
like to add at the moment now that I am about to finish questioning you
that you think you would like to have on the record?

Mr. PIC. If you are interested in my opinions----

Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir; anything that you want to add.

Mr. PIC. I think, I believe that Lee Oswald did the crime that he is
accused of. I think that anything he may have done was aided with a
little extra push from his mother in the living conditions that she
presented to him. I also think that his reason for leaving the Marine
Corps is not true and accurate. I mean I don't think he cared to get
out of the Marine Corps to help his mother. He probably used this as an
excuse to get out and go to his defection.

I know myself I wouldn't have gotten out of the service because of her,
and I am sure Robert wouldn't either, and this makes me believe that
Lee wouldn't have.

Mr. JENNER. What kind of a student was your brother, do you know, do
you recall, rather?

Mr. PIC. I think in elementary school he was fairly good, sir.

Mr. JENNER. But then in the later grades, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th?

Mr. PIC. I have no idea, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Well, that is about all. I sure appreciate your coming, and
the Commission likewise, at some inconvenience to yourself. You will be
able to catch that 9:50 plane in the morning and get yourself back to
your son's birthday party.

Mr. PIC. I hope what I have told you has been something new and not
repetitious.

Mr. JENNER. Much of what you have told us has been new. Much of
what you have told us has been very helpful to us in the way of
corroborating matters about which we were not fully informed or in
doubt, and opinions have been expressed particularly with respect to
your brother have been helpful.

That leads me to ask you this further question: Give me your overall
impression of your brother Lee Oswald as a personality, as he developed.

Mr. PIC. Sir; I remember Lee Oswald as a child, up until about the age
of 11 or 12. To me, he appeared a normal healthy robust boy who would
get in fights and still have his serious moments.

Mr. JENNER. You got in fights, too, didn't you?

Mr. PIC. Sure.

Mr. JENNER. And your brother Robert?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. These are not fights that you would regard as other than
boys getting into?

Mr. PIC. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. That is, it wasn't because he was unduly belligerent?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Go ahead.

Mr. PIC. He got in his usual trouble around the neighborhood as far as
getting in people's yards, probably, and letting the dog go astray,
normal healthy boy.

I think as he became older, prior to me entering the service, he became
slightly cocky and belligerent toward his mother. He never showed any
of this toward Robert or myself. I am afraid it probably rubbed off of
Robert and myself and it affected Lee, because we didn't really take
much stock into what she was saying. I don't think we were as cocky, as
belligerent as he was. There was----

Mr. JENNER. Do you think that was a defensive mechanism, on his part?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; I think so.

Mr. JENNER. Did your mother ever say anything around your home about
that employers were overreaching her, and employers overreached poor
working people or anything along those lines?

Mr. PIC. No; she always reminded us she worked like a slave to provide
for us three boys. She couldn't wait for a day we would grow up and
support her.

When Lee visited us in New York he came there a friendly, nice
easy-to-like kid.

Mr. JENNER. This is 1952 in the summer?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir; he had the interest of boys at that age, the Museum
of Natural History, sightseeing excursions and so forth. Until the
incident where I talked to him we never had a bad word between us other
than maybe joking or playing around. I tried to interest him in a hobby
of building boats or collecting stamps again while he was----

Mr. JENNER. Had he been interested in those two hobbies?

Mr. PIC. Yes; he and I, all three of us collected stamps. I played
chess with Lee quite a bit and Robert, too. We all did this. Played
monopoly together, the three of us.

When I approached him on this knife-pulling incident he became very
hostile towards me. And he was never the same again with me.

Mr. JENNER. That was the first time he had ever been hostile in that
sense towards you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that rupture was never repaired thereafter?

Mr. PIC. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have the impression when you saw him on
Thanksgiving of 1962 that in the meantime he had become embittered,
resentful of his station?

Mr. PIC. Well, sir; the Lee Harvey Oswald I met in November of 1962
was not the Lee Harvey Oswald I had known 10 years previous. This
person struck me as someone with a chip on his shoulder, who had these
purposes I mentioned, to do something about.

Mr. JENNER. What purposes?

Mr. PIC. To repay the Government and get his discharge changed.

It appeared to me that he was a good father towards his child, and not
knowing the conversation between he and his wife I couldn't form much
of an opinion there.

Mr. JENNER. All right, sir; that is about it.

Mr. PIC. OK, sir; thank you very much.

Mr. JENNER. This transcript will be prepared by the reporters and it
will be sent to your commanding officer, and would you please get it
immediately and read it and sign it.

If you make any corrections in it, put your initials beside the
correction, or over, above, your initial somewhere around the
correction so we know it is you who did it, and return it to us as
promptly as possible.

It may be that the Secret Service will bring it out, but it will be
delivered to you next week.

All right.



AFFIDAVIT OF EDWARD JOHN PIC, JR.

The following affidavit was executed by Edward John Pic, Jr., on June
16, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF LOUISIANA,
 _Parish of Orleans, ss_:

Edward John Pic, Jr., 6 Jay Street, New Orleans, La., being duly sworn
says:

1. I am the same Edward John Pic, Jr., who was deposed by Albert E.
Jenner, Jr., member of the legal staff of the President's Commission
on the Assassination of President Kennedy, on April 7, 1964. When
Marguerite Claverie Pic and I separated after we had lived together a
year, we resided in a house on Genois Street, south of Canal Street,
in New Orleans. This was a rented house. The rent was either $28 or
$30 per month. At no time prior to our separation did Marguerite work.
During all of that period she was a housewife.

2. I neither refused nor failed to support her either during or after
our marriage. There were personality and incompatibility difficulties
between us commencing at an early stage of our marriage. We just
couldn't get along, things kept getting worse and worse. Marguerite
was aware of my earning capacity at the time we married. There were
difficulties between us respecting money and household financial
management, but this was only one of the sources of the difficulties.
My financial situation did not worsen after our marriage.

3. Marguerite's pregnancy with my son John Edward Pic was not the cause
of our separation. I had no objection to children. It was a coincidence
that about that time we had reached the point that we could not make
a go with each other any more. Our separation which was amicable
and which was arranged through an attorney would have taken place
irrespective of Marguerite's pregnancy with my son John Edward Pic.

4. As I testified in my deposition, Marguerite was a nice girl. I
haven't anything whatsoever adverse to say against her, it is just that
we couldn't get along. Our dispositions would not jell. I do not mean
to imply that the fault, if any, lay with either of us. We just didn't
get along.

5. My distinct recollection is that I had no difficulty maintaining the
household and supporting my family though there was some difference
between Marguerite and me as to the manner, style and the level on
which our household should be maintained.

Signed the 16th day of June 1964.

    (S) Edward John Pic, Jr.,
        EDWARD JOHN PIC, Jr.



TESTIMONY OF KERRY WENDELL THORNLEY

The testimony of Kerry Wendell Thornley was taken at 9:40 a.m., on May
18, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Messrs. John
Ely and Albert E. Jenner, Jr., assistant counsel of the President's
Commission.


Mr. JENNER. Mr. Thornley, in the deposition you are about to give, do
you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Mr. THORNLEY. I do.

Mr. JENNER. You are Kerry Wendell Thornley, spelled K-e-r-r-y
W-e-n-d-e-l-l T-h-o-r-n-l-e-y?

Mr. THORNLEY. That is correct, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Mr. Thornley, where do you reside now?

Mr. THORNLEY. At 4201 South 31st Street in Arlington, Va.

Mr. JENNER. Did you at one time reside at 1824 Dauphine Street in New
Orleans?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What is your present occupation?

Mr. THORNLEY. I am a doorman at the building where I reside,
Shirlington House.

Mr. JENNER. Doorman.

Mr. THORNLEY. At the building where I reside.

Mr. JENNER. What is the name of that building?

Mr. THORNLEY. Shirlington House. I also work on the switchboard there
three nights a week.

Mr. JENNER. I see. By the way, Mr. Thornley, you received, did you not,
a letter from Mr. Rankin, the general counsel of the Commission in
which he enclosed----

Mr. THORNLEY. Confirming this appointment----

Mr. JENNER. Copies of the legislation, Senate Joint Resolution No. 137,
authorizing the creation of the Commission and President Johnson's
Order 11130, bringing the Commission into existence and fixing its
powers and duties and responsibilities?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And also a copy of the rules and regulations of the
Commission for the taking of depositions?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I take it you understand the basic obligation placed
upon the Commission is to investigate the facts and circumstances
surrounding and bearing upon the assassination of President Kennedy,
and events collateral thereto.

In the course of doing that the Commission and its staff, and I, Albert
E. Jenner, Jr., a member of the Commission legal staff, have been
interviewing and taking the testimony of various persons who, among
other things, came in contact with a man named Lee Harvey Oswald. We
understand that you had some contact with him, fortuitous or otherwise
as it might be. Are we correct in that?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us the--may I ask you this first. Were you
born and reared in this country?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Are you married or unmarried?

Mr. THORNLEY. Unmarried.

Mr. JENNER. Unmarried you said?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What is your age?

Mr. THORNLEY. I am 26.

Mr. JENNER. When was your birthday?

Mr. THORNLEY. April 17, this last month.

Mr. JENNER. April 17 of this last month? I am poor in mathematics, what
year was your birth?

Mr. THORNLEY. 1938.

Mr. JENNER. When did you first become acquainted with him?

Mr. THORNLEY. I was--it was around Easter of 1959, either shortly
before or shortly after.

Mr. JENNER. Let's see. He was in the Marines at that time?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. I take it you also were?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. How long had you been in the Marines?

Mr. THORNLEY. At that time I had been in the Marines over half a year.
I had been in the Reserve for many years. I had been on active duty for
over half a year.

Mr. JENNER. You were then 21 years of age?

Mr. THORNLEY. About; yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Tell me about what your occupation and activity had been up
to the time you enlisted in the Marines.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, the year before I was a student at the University
of Southern California, and before that I was a student at California
High School in Whittier, Calif.

Mr. JENNER. I take it then that you are a native Californian?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you receive your degree?

Mr. THORNLEY. No. I was--I completed my freshman year and then I went
on active duty to serve my 2-year obligation in the Marine Reserve.

Mr. JENNER. You did not return to college after you were mustered out
of the Marines?

Mr. THORNLEY. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Was your discharge honorable?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Where were you based when you first met Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. THORNLEY. At a subsidiary of El Toro Marine Base, referred to as
LTA, Santa Ana, Calif., or just outside of Santa Ana.

Mr. JENNER. What was your rank at that time?

Mr. THORNLEY. At that time I was acting corporal.

Mr. JENNER. What was your assignment then?

Mr. THORNLEY. I was an aviation electronics operator. I was working in
an aircraft control center reading radarscopes and keeping track of
ingoing and outgoing flights.

Mr. JENNER. What was Lee Harvey Oswald's assignment and activity
service-wise at that period?

Mr. THORNLEY. At that time his assignments and activities were primary
janitorial. He was--he had lost his clearance previously, and if I
remember, he was assigned to make the coffee, mow the lawn, swab down
decks, and things of this nature.

Mr. JENNER. What were the circumstances as you learned of them, or knew
of them at the time, as to how or why he lost his clearance as you put
it.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I asked somebody, and I was told, and I don't
remember who told me, it was a general rumor, general scuttlebutt
at the time, that he had poured beer over a staff NCO's head in an
enlisted club in Japan, and had been put in the brig for that, and
having been put in the brig would automatically lose his clearance to
work in the electronics control center.

Mr. JENNER. I was going to ask you what losing clearance meant. You
have indicated that--or would you state it more specifically.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, that meant in a practical sense, that meant that he
was not permitted to enter certain areas wherein the equipment, in this
case equipment, was kept; that we would not want other unauthorized
persons to have knowledge of. And on occasion information, I imagine,
would also come to the man who was cleared, in the process of his work,
that he would be expected to keep to himself.

Mr. JENNER. I assume you had clearance?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir; I was, I think, cleared for confidential at the
time.

Mr. JENNER. Cleared for confidential. I was about to ask you what level
of clearance was involved.

Mr. THORNLEY. I believe it was just confidential to work there at El
Toro on that particular equipment.

Mr. JENNER. That is the clearance about which you speak when you talk
about Oswald having lost it?

Mr. THORNLEY. Oswald, I believe, had a higher clearance. This is also
just based upon rumor. I believe he at one time worked in the security
files, it is the S & C files, somewhere either at LTA or at El Toro.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever work in the security files?

Mr. THORNLEY. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that was a level of clearance----

Mr. THORNLEY. Probably a secret clearance would be required.

Mr. JENNER. It was at least higher than the clearance about which you
first spoke?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. The clearance that you had in mind of which you first spoke
was the clearance to operate radar detection devices?

Mr. THORNLEY. Right.

Mr. JENNER. And your knowledge of his loss of clearance was by hearsay
or rumor. As I understand it the circumstances took place off base one
day?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; this was on base as I understand it. It was in an
enlisted club or staff sergeant's club, something of that nature.

Mr. JENNER. He had gotten into difficulty with a staff sergeant and had
poured beer on the person of a staff sergeant and gotten into some kind
of an altercation?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. As a result of that he was court-martialed and had been
subjected to the loss of clearance?

Mr. THORNLEY. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. Was that clearance of his restored?

Mr. THORNLEY. I doubt it very much, because 3 months afterwards, after
I had left the outfit--I know it wasn't restored while I was in the
outfit.

Mr. JENNER. When did you leave the outfit?

Mr. THORNLEY. I left in June and went overseas.

Mr. JENNER. Up to that time his clearance had not been restored?

Mr. THORNLEY. Definitely not. And shortly thereafter he got out of the
service.

Mr. JENNER. So that as far as you have any personal knowledge Oswald
never operated any radar equipment while he was at El Toro, did you say?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; El Toro, LTA. As far as my personal knowledge goes,
he didn't.

Mr. JENNER. Would you state the circumstances under which you became
acquainted--let me put it this way first. What was the extent of your
acquaintance with Lee Harvey Oswald, and here at the moment I am
directing myself only to whether you were friends, were you merely
on the base together? Indicate the level of friendship first or
acquaintanceship.

Mr. THORNLEY. I would say we were close acquaintances in the sense that
we weren't friends in that we didn't pull liberty together or seek
each other out, yet when we were thrown together in an assignment or
something, moving equipment, something of that nature, we spoke and
when we were on the base and happened to be in the same area and were
not required to be working, we would sometimes sit down and discuss
things. That would be my statement there.

Mr. JENNER. So there was a degree of affinity in the sense that you
were friendly in performing your military tasks together whenever you
were thrown together in that respect. You felt friendly toward each
other. You were never off base with him on liberty?

Mr. THORNLEY. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. There were times when you were at liberty on the base, I
assume, and you and he fraternized?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Now, did you live in the same quarters?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, not actually. We lived in quonset huts there, and
he lived in a different hut than I did. We did live in the same general
area, however.

Mr. JENNER. This acquaintance arose in the spring of 1959, is that
correct?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Can you fix the time a little more definitely than merely
the spring?

Mr. THORNLEY. I really can't, sir. I have been racking my brain on
that one since November, and I can't fix the time. I do remember
having taken some time off that year around Easter and going on a trip
with some civilian friends of mine, who were out of school for Easter
vacation, and I know I was in the outfit that Oswald was in at that
time, and I know that either shortly before that trip or shortly
afterwards. I can remember from the books I was reading at the time and
things like that, that I met him.

Mr. JENNER. Do you associate the books you were reading at that time
with anything Oswald may have been reading?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes. Oswald was not reading but did advise me to read
George Orwell's "1984" which I read at that time.

Mr. JENNER. Was he on the base when you came there?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I was on the base in a different outfit before I
came into MACS 9, the outfit I was in.

Mr. JENNER. Marine Air Control Squadron.

Mr. THORNLEY. I was in MACS 4 which was right next door to MACS 9 or
was at that time, on the base.

Mr. JENNER. Were you aware of his presence when you were in the other
MACS?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; not until I came into his outfit. And only sometime
after I came into that outfit did I become aware of his presence.

Mr. JENNER. Were you--I will withdraw that. Was Oswald as far as you
knew on the base before you came over to his unit?

Mr. THORNLEY. I would assume so, but I wouldn't know for sure. I know
he was recently back from Japan as were most of the men in Marine
Control Squadron 9 when I came into it. How long he had been back I
don't know. I certainly didn't know at that time. And thinking on what
knowledge of him I have gained since then, I still couldn't say.

Mr. JENNER. Well, in any event you first became acquainted with or
aware of his presence around Easter time in 1959?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And you were transferred from that base when?

Mr. THORNLEY. June.

Mr. JENNER. In June. So likely it was that you knew him in April, May,
and in June until you were transferred out?

Mr. THORNLEY. Right.

Mr. JENNER. When in June were you transferred out?

Mr. THORNLEY. Once again the exact date would be available in my
military record, but offhand----

Mr. JENNER. Give it to me as best you recall it, forepart, latter part,
middle?

Mr. THORNLEY. Let's see, it was toward the latter part. In fact, I can
give you pretty close to the exact date. It was around June 25, because
we arrived in Japan on July 4 and it took 11 days to get over there. It
took us some time to get debarked or to get embarked, rather.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I take it from the remark you have made in your
reflecting on this matter that you were--you devoted yourself to some
fairly considerable extent to reading?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And in what fields?

Mr. THORNLEY. Completely omniverous. Anything that I would happen
to get a hold of I would read. At that time I was reading, well, at
Oswald's advice I read "1984." At someone else's advice I was reading
a book called "Humanism," by Corliss Lamont, as I remember, and I was
reading either "The Brothers Karamazov" or the "Idiot" by Dostoievsky,
I forget which, at that time.

Mr. JENNER. But your reading had some reasonable amount of organization
or direction?

Mr. THORNLEY. None whatsoever; no, sir. It never has.

Mr. JENNER. I see. You weren't engaged in any organized reading at that
time, were you?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. But there were areas which did draw your attention by and
large?

Mr. THORNLEY. Definitely; yes.

Mr. JENNER. What were those areas?

Mr. THORNLEY. Philosophy, politics, religion.

Mr. JENNER. Did you find that Oswald had reasonably similar interests?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; I would say.

Mr. JENNER. In his reading?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; I would say particularly in politics and philosophy.

Mr. JENNER. Was it those mutual interests that brought about your
acquaintance with him or some other fashion?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir; it was those interests. My first memory of him
is that one afternoon he was sitting on a bucket out in front of a
hut, an inverted bucket, with some other Marines. They were discussing
religion. I entered the discussion. It was known already in the outfit
that I was an atheist. Immediately somebody pointed out to me that
Oswald was also an atheist.

Mr. JENNER. Did they point that out to you in his presence?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What reaction did he have to that?

Mr. THORNLEY. He said, "What do you think of communism?" and I said----

Mr. JENNER. He didn't say anything about having been pointed out as
being an atheist?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; he wasn't offended at this at all. He was--it was
done in a friendly manner, anyway, and he just said to me--the first
thing he said to me was with his little grin; he looked at me and he
said, "What do you think of communism?" And I replied I didn't think
too much of communism, in a favorable sense, and he said, "Well, I
think the best religion is communism." And I got the impression at
the time that he said this in order to shock. He was playing to the
galleries, I felt.

Mr. JENNER. The boys who were sitting around?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Engaged in scuttlebutt?

Mr. THORNLEY. Right. He was smirking as he said this and he said it
very gently. He didn't seem to be a glass-eyed fanatic by any means.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have occasion to discuss the same subject
thereafter?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. From time to time?

Mr. THORNLEY. From time to time.

Mr. JENNER. Was it reasonably frequent?

Mr. THORNLEY. I would say about a half dozen times in that time period.

Mr. JENNER. In those subsequent discussions were some of them private
in the sense you were not gathered around with others?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I don't recall us ever having a private serious
discussion. A couple of times we were working together. There would be
others around, not on a constant basis anyway, but coming and going,
and as I recall a couple of times we were thrown together. Working
together, we weren't having a serious discussion; we were joking.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have occasion in those additional half dozen
instances of discussions with him, the viewpoint you have just
expressed, that is, that his initial raising of the issue was more by
way of provoking or shocking those about him rather than any utterances
on his part of sincerity in a belief that communism was itself a
religion?

Mr. THORNLEY. It became obvious to me after a while, in talking to
him, that definitely he thought that communism was the best--that the
Marxist morality was the most rational morality to follow that he knew
of. And that communism was the best system in the world.

I still certainly wouldn't--wouldn't have predicted, for example, his
defection to the Soviet Union, because once again he seemed idle in his
admiration for communism. He didn't seem to be an activist.

Mr. JENNER. Would you explain what you mean by idle in his admiration
of the communistic system?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, it seemed to be theoretical. It seemed strictly a
dispassionate appraisal--I did know at the time that he was learning
the Russian language. I knew he was subscribing to Pravda or a Russian
newspaper of some kind from Moscow. All of this I took as a sign of his
interest in the subject, and not as a sign of any active commitment to
the Communist ends.

Mr. JENNER. You felt there was no devotion there. That it was somewhat
of an intellectual interest, a curiosity. But I don't want to put words
in your mouth, so tell me.

Mr. THORNLEY. I wouldn't put it quite that weakly. While I didn't feel
there was any rabid devotion there, I wouldn't call it a complete idle
curiosity either. I would call it a definite interest.

Mr. JENNER. A definite interest.

Mr. THORNLEY. But not a fanatical devotion.

Mr. JENNER. You said you knew at that time that he was studying
Russian. How did you become aware of that?

Mr. THORNLEY. Probably by hearsay once again. I do remember one time
hearing the comment made by one man in the outfit that there was some
other man in the outfit who was taking a Russian newspaper and who was
a Communist and when I said, "Well, who is that?" he said, "Oswald,"
and I said, "Oh, well." That is probably where I learned it.

Mr. JENNER. How did you learn that he was a subscriber to Pravda and
the other Russian publications you have mentioned?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I don't think--it was either Pravda or some other
Russian publication.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. THORNLEY. The way I learned that was a story that I believe Bud
Simco, a friend of mine in the same outfit, in the outfit at the same
time, told me that one time a lieutenant, and I forget which lieutenant
it was (I do remember at the time I did know who he was talking about)
found out that Oswald, by--he happened to be in the mailroom or
something, and saw a paper with Oswald's address on it.

Mr. JENNER. That is the officer happened to be in the mailroom?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; and that it was written--he noticed this paper was
written in Russian and at the time got very excited, attempted to
draw this to the attention of Oswald's section chief, the commanding
officer, and, of course, there was nothing these people could do
about it, and at the time the story was related to me. I remember
I thought it was rather humorous that this young, either second or
first lieutenant should get so excited because Oswald happened to be
subscribing to a Russian newspaper.

Mr. JENNER. Was this lieutenant's name Delprado?

Mr. THORNLEY. I will bet it was. That is very familiar. I think so.

Mr. JENNER. Have you ever subscribed to a Russian language newspaper or
other publications?

Mr. THORNLEY. Other Russian publications?

Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir.

Mr. THORNLEY. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Have you ever subscribed to a publication that was printed
in the Russian language?

Mr. THORNLEY. No, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Have you ever been a subscriber to any literature by way of
news media or otherwise, published by any organization reputed to be
communistic or pink or that sort of thing? I don't want to get it too
broad.

Mr. THORNLEY. Only I. F. Stone's newsletter and that certainly----

Mr. JENNER. Whose?

Mr. THORNLEY. I. F. Stone's newsletter and I wouldn't say----

Mr. JENNER. Tell me about that.

Mr. THORNLEY. He is a Washington reporter who is a rather extreme
leftist, but certainly within the bounds of what is accepted in this
country as non-subversive.

Mr. JENNER. Describe yourself in that respect. Where are you, a
middle-of-the-roader?

Mr. THORNLEY. I would say I am an extreme rightist. I call myself a
libertarian, which is that I believe in the complete sovereignty of
the individual, or at least as much individual liberty as is practical
under any given system.

Mr. JENNER. You don't have to be an extreme rightist to believe in the
sovereignty of the individual.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, it is getting that way in this country today. At
least most people who listen to me talk call me a rightist. I wouldn't
say so either. I think the political spectrum was fine for France at
the time of the revolution. I don't think it applies to the United
States of America today in any respect whatsoever. I don't think you
can call a man an extreme leftist, rightist, or middle-of-the-roader
and have him classified that simply.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any brothers and sisters?

Mr. THORNLEY. I have two brothers.

Mr. JENNER. What do they do?

Mr. THORNLEY. They go to, one of them goes to junior college, I
believe, and the other one goes to high school. They are in Whittier,
Calif.

Mr. JENNER. Are your folks alive?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What does your father do?

Mr. THORNLEY. He is a photoengraver.

Mr. JENNER. Let's get back to Oswald. Describe this individual to me.
First describe him physically.

Mr. THORNLEY. Physically, I would say he was slightly below average
height. Had, as I recall, gray or blue eyes. Always had, or almost
always had a petulant expression on his face. Pursed-up lip expression,
either a frown or a smile, depending on the circumstances. Was of
average build, and his hair was brown, and tending to, like mine,
tending to bald a little on each side.

Mr. JENNER. Above the temple. What would you say he weighed?

Mr. THORNLEY. I would say he weighed about 140 pounds, maybe 130.

Mr. JENNER. How tall was he?

Mr. THORNLEY. I would say he was about five-five maybe. I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. How tall are you?

Mr. THORNLEY. I am five-ten.

Mr. JENNER. Was he shorter than you?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What habits did he have with respect to his person--was he
neat, clean?

Mr. THORNLEY. Extremely sloppy.

Mr. JENNER. Extremely sloppy?

Mr. THORNLEY. He was. This I think might not have been true of him in
civilian life.

Mr. JENNER. You don't know one way or the other?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; but I do have reason to believe that it wasn't true
of him in civilian life because it fitted into a general personality
pattern of his: to do whatever was not wanted of him, a recalcitrant
trend in his personality.

Mr. JENNER. You think it was deliberate?

Mr. THORNLEY. I think it tended to be deliberate; yes. It was a gesture
of rebellion on his part.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever discuss that matter with him, as dress.

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. The attitude of rebellion?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; because this attitude of rebellion was a fairly
common thing in the service.

Mr. JENNER. On the part of others as well as Oswald?

Mr. THORNLEY. As well as Oswald. Oswald did carry it to--was the most
extreme example I can think of stateside. However, overseas, in the
outfit he had been in before, as I discovered later, this was quite
common.

Mr. JENNER. How much later?

Mr. THORNLEY. Three months--well, immediately, as soon as I left, as
soon as I got overseas. I walked in to the barracks on the Fourth
of July over there and saw beer bottles spread all over, and some
character sitting in the back of the barracks with a broken beer bottle
cutting his arm, for what reason I don't remember. They found beer cans
in a trash can in MACS 9 and there was a drastic investigation; so
there is an indication of a difference between stateside and overseas.
Oswald was typical, very typical of the outfit he had just left
overseas.

Mr. JENNER. So that it is your impression, you would say. I gather,
that as of that particular time when you first knew him that he was
still carrying some of his experience personal attentionwise from what
he had experienced overseas?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And he was still following the habits he had acquired
overseas?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Did you think it went beyond that, this unkemptness or this
sloppiness?

Mr. THORNLEY. It did go beyond that, because he seemed to be a person
who would go out of his way to get into trouble, get some officer or
staff sergeant mad at him. He would make wise remarks. He had a general
bitter attitude toward the Corps. He used to pull his hat down over his
eyes so he wouldn't have to look at anything around him and go walking
around very Beetle Bailey style.

Mr. JENNER. What is Beetle Bailey?

Mr. THORNLEY. Beetle Bailey is a comic strip character who walks around
with his hat over his eyes very much as Oswald did.

Mr. JENNER. You want to keep in mind, Mr. Thornley, I am an old man and
there are things I don't pick up or get hep to.

Mr. THORNLEY. This is nothing recent. This is a comic strip that has
been around quite a few years now.

Mr. JENNER. You go on and tell us about his personality.

Mr. THORNLEY. All right.

Mr. JENNER. Including any physical characteristics or habits.

Mr. THORNLEY. I think I have covered all physical characteristics. His
shoes were always unshined. As I mentioned, he walked around with the
bill of his cap down over his eyes and you got the impression that he
was doing this so he wouldn't have to look at anything around him.

Mr. JENNER. And he was doing that so that he would not be assigned
additional work or----

Mr. THORNLEY. No; he was just doing that--this was just an attempt, I
think, on his part, to blot out the military so he wouldn't have to
look at it; he wouldn't have to think about it. In fact, I think he
made a comment to that effect at one time; that when he had his bill of
his cap over his eyes so he would see as little as possible, because he
didn't like what he had to look at.

He had, as I remember, he had a sense of humor, and I can only think of
a couple of examples of it. I have only been able to think of a couple
of examples of it over the past few months, but I have a strong general
impression in my mind that there were more examples that I just don't
remember.

Mr. JENNER. Well, you draw on your recollection as best you can and
you just keep telling us now in your own words and I will try to not
interrupt you too much.

Mr. THORNLEY. All right. One example was, that I remember--of course,
it was well known in the outfit that, or popularly believed that Oswald
had Communist sympathies----

Mr. JENNER. You didn't share that view?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not as much as some did, and while this was popularly
believed, I mention this as kind of a framework for the significance of
Oswald's comment: Master Sergeant Spar, our section chief, jumped up
on the fender one day and said, "All right, everybody gather around,"
and Oswald said in a very thick Russian accent, "Ah ha, collective farm
lecture," in a very delighted tone.

This brought him laughs at the time, and he had gotten me to read
"1984," as I mentioned earlier, and this was one of his favorites----

Mr. JENNER. Tell me what "1984" was.

Mr. THORNLEY. This was a book about--it is a projection into the
future, supposed to take place in 1984 in England under a complete
police state. It is, I would say, an anti-utopian novel, by George
Orwell, a criticism of English socialism and what it might lead
to, based upon Orwell's experiences with communism and nazism, his
observations about a society in which a mythical leader called Big
Brother dominates everybody's life. Where there are television cameras
on every individual at all times watching his every act, where sex is
practically outlawed, where the world is perpetually at war, three big
police states constantly at war with one another, and where thought
police keep every, all of the citizens in line. Oswald would often
compare the Marine Corps with the system of government outlined in
"1984."

I remember one day we were loading equipment----

Mr. JENNER. By way of protest against the Marine Corps?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; humorously, satirically. One day we were unloading,
moving a radarscope off the truck and it slipped, and he said, "Be
careful with Big Brother's equipment."

It was things like this. He did a lot of that.

I remember one day he--I was walking along with my hands in my pocket,
which is something you don't do in the service if you are--certainly
if you are in an infantry outfit you don't dare. Things were a little
lax in our outfit, so we could get away with it once in a while, so I
happened to be walking along with my hands in my pockets and suddenly I
heard a voice: "Hey, Smith, Winston," and rattle off a serial number,
"get your hands out of your pockets," which was a direct quote from the
book "1984."

These are the only examples of Oswald's, that particular aspect of
Oswald's character that I recall.

Mr. JENNER. I am stimulated to ask you this question by something you
just said. Did he have a good memory?

Mr. THORNLEY. I think he must have had a good memory; yes. If he wanted
to remember something, he could. I think he also had good ability to
blot out unpleasant thoughts in his mind.

Mr. JENNER. What about his powers of assimilation of what he read, and
his powers of critique?

Mr. THORNLEY. I certainly think he understood much more than many
people in the press have seemed to feel. I don't think he was a man who
was grasping onto his particular beliefs because he didn't understand
them. I don't think he was just trying to know something over his head,
by any means. I think he understood what he was talking about.

Sometimes I think there were gaps in his knowledge. I think there were
many things he didn't know, and this came from a haphazard education.

Mr. JENNER. You became acquainted with the fact that he had had a
somewhat haphazard education?

Mr. THORNLEY. It was obvious. I didn't become acquainted with it
specifically until recently in the news. But----

Mr. JENNER. You had that impression at the time?

Mr. THORNLEY. I had that impression; yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. How did that impression arise? Because of the lack of
analysis or real critique on his part of that which he was reading?
Inability to assimilate the thrust of a work?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I wouldn't say that. I would say he could analyze
what he read very well, but it was a very subjective impression, and
the idea I got was that there were a lot of things he didn't know, and
just a lot of facts that he wasn't familiar with. I guess sometimes,
probably in discussions, I would run into something. I would mention
something and he would say, "What is that?"

I know we did have a couple of very hot arguments and I am sure we were
throwing facts at one another, and he was certainly able to belt them
out when he wanted to, facts that suited his purpose in arguing.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression of his--the extent of his formal
education and the extent of any private education of his; that is,
reading--self-education.

Mr. THORNLEY. Self-education. I was certainly surprised that--when I
read in the papers that he had not graduated, I think they said he had
not graduated from high school.

Mr. JENNER. That is correct.

Mr. THORNLEY. I thought he had graduated from high school. I assumed
that. I would say that his self-education certainly must have
been--perhaps, in fact, he took USAFI courses, U.S. Armed Forces
Institute courses, or something along that line, because he was one who
gave the impression of having some education, certainly.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have an impression of his intellect?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; I think he was----

Mr. JENNER. I am speaking in the abstract.

Mr. THORNLEY. I think he was extremely intelligent, with what
information he had at hand he could always do very well and in an
argument he was quick. He was quick to answer, and it was not a matter
of just grabbing at something. It was a matter of coming back with a
fairly precise answer to your question or to your objection to his
argument.

Mr. JENNER. I take it then it was your impression--I will change my
question because I don't want to ask a leading question here.

What was your impression as to whether his learning, in the sense we
are talking about now, was superficial or was he able to master that
which he read, and engage in personal self-critique of that which he
read, discover its weaknesses, and apprehend its major thrust?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I would say as I have said before, he certainly
understood what he read. How much he had read, I don't know, but I
do know that when he got on a subject in which he was interested, he
showed a grasp of it. This is true with the book "1984," for example.
It is true with Marxism.

Mr. JENNER. Now that interests me also. You mentioned that before;
that is, his espousal of or interest in Marxism as such. What was his
ability, if he had any, and I am talking now idealistically only, to
compare Marxism, communism, democracy?

Mr. THORNLEY. I understand. I think----

Mr. JENNER. And did he understand the distinctions?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I think he understood the distinctions as well as
most reasonably educated people do. I think he certainly had a Marxist
bias in how--where he drew the lines.

For example, he could look upon the Soviet system today as a democracy
by, of course, giving a completely different definition to the word
"democracy" than I, for example. He would give----

Mr. JENNER. Can you remember some discussions or incidents that explain
that? Would he use objectivism?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I remember one in particular that always reminded
me of his general outlook.

One day we got into an argument and I thought I was really going to pin
him to the wall, I thought I was going to win this argument.

Mr. JENNER. On what subject?

Mr. THORNLEY. On Marxism. On the theory of history.

Mr. JENNER. Reconstruct the argument for me.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, all right. Let me add this.

When I was in my freshman year in college, in my English class, I
believe it was, perhaps it was a history class we had been required
to read, it was a history workshop, we had been required to read
the Communist manifesto which presents an outline of the theory of
the Marx-Engels outlook on past and future history. The dialectical
outlook. Oswald was also familiar with this outlook. As to what it
constituted we both agreed. Oswald had argued previously that communism
was a rational approach to life, a scientific approach to life, Marxism.

Mr. JENNER. This was in argumentation with you?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. THORNLEY. With me. I challenged him to show me any shred of
evidence to support the idea that history took place in the manner
described by Engels and Marx (this was not just an arbitrary system
looted as many suspect, from Hegel) and he, after some attempt to give
me a satisfactory answer, which he was unable to do, became aware of
that and he admitted that there was no justification, logically, for
the Communist theory of history or the Marxist theory of history, but
that Marxism was still, in his opinion, the best system for other
reasons that there was----

Mr. JENNER. Best as against what?

Mr. THORNLEY. As against, well primarily as against religions. He
did--that first comment of his always sticks in my mind, about
communism being the best religion. He did think of communism as, not as
a religion in the strict sense but as an overwhelming cultural outlook
that, once applied to a country, would make it much better off than,
say the Roman Catholic Church cultural outlook or the Hindu cultural
outlook or the Islamic cultural outlook, and he felt that, as I say, to
get back to this argument, he felt that there were enough other things
about communism that justified it that one could accept the theory of
history on faith.

Mr. JENNER. What other things?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, for one thing: the idea that he felt--as did
Marx--that under capitalism workers are exploited, that in some way
they are robbed of their full reward for their work by means of
entrepreneurs' profits, and he felt that Marxism took his money but
instead of taking it away from the worker spent it on the worker.

He felt that under a Soviet--under the present Soviet system, for
example, that the money was spent for the benefit of the people rather
than going to the individual who happened to be running the enterprise,
and he thought this was a juster situation.

Mr. JENNER. Did you raise with him the price the individual had to pay
for the material accommodation accorded the worker under the Communist
system; for the substance or money, of which you speak, being returned
to the worker? The price paid in terms of individual liberty as against
the capitalistic or democratic system?

Mr. THORNLEY. You couldn't say this to him. Because he would say: "How
do you know? How do you know what is going on there."

Mr. JENNER. First; did you raise it with him?

Mr. THORNLEY. I raised it with him.

Mr. JENNER. You being a libertarian as you say?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, at that time I was--my ideas have changed since
that time. At that time I was much to the left in my political thinking
once again; well, I would say about in the same position that Mr. Stone
who I spoke of earlier is now. I was on the "left-hand" side of the
acceptable political spectrum in this country, and so, therefore, these
issues, the issues I would now raise with him had I again the chance to
speak to him, would be much different than the issues I raised with him
at that time. I did not raise that issue particularly, I did not push
it.

Mr. JENNER. Was there much, if any, discussion at the time on the issue
of individual liberty?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; very little, because I wasn't too concerned about it
at the time and neither was he. We were both concerned about what was
the best for the greatest number of people. I don't think that concept
was clear to either one of us.

Mr. JENNER. But, even having in mind the status of your political
thinking at that moment, your political thinking did not square with
his?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I was opposed to the great trust that he put in, much
greater than I suspected at that time, of course, trust that he put in
the Soviet Government in the world today I felt they were misguided
idealists. He felt they weren't misguided.

Mr. JENNER. Give us as best you can recall his comments and views with
respect to capitalism of the variety then existing, or as he understood
existed in this Nation.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I wouldn't say that we--I can't recall us having
gone into any detail about anything so relevant to anything as
capitalism in this Nation at the time.

Mr. JENNER. These discussions were broader. They were more abstract?

Mr. THORNLEY. Usually, yes. Whenever we got specific we usually
discussed the Marine Corps.

Mr. JENNER. I see. You did not discuss the United States of America as
such?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. And the Soviet Union as such, and compared the two
countries?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, as I say, you couldn't do this with Oswald because
whenever you tried to make any statement about the Soviet Union he
would challenge it on the grounds that we were probably propagandized
in this country and we had no knowledge of what was going on over there.

Mr. JENNER. Did he purport to know what was going on over there?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Did he show any interest in what was going on over there?

Mr. THORNLEY. He definitely showed interest.

Mr. JENNER. Give us some examples and tell us.

Mr. THORNLEY. I would say he took an agnostical approach to this. It
seemed that he didn't know whether to believe what he read in his
Russian newspaper, not that he used those exact words, or what he heard
in this country. He took the attitude that "Well, they may be right and
we may be right but I suspect they are right." This, of course, once
again, I always got the impression in any of these discussions that
part of his slight bias toward the Communist way of life was an act of
rebellion against the present circumstances.

Mr. JENNER. Do you think that bias, if any, was a mild bias?

Mr. THORNLEY. I thought so at the time.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have any impression at anytime that he was
interested from an objective standpoint; that he might like to
experience by way of personal investigation what was going on in Russia?

Mr. THORNLEY. It never dawned on me. It was the farthest thing from
my mind. Although I certainly will say this: When he did go to Russia
it seemed to me as a much more likely alternative for Oswald than say
joining the Communist Party in the United States.

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me.

Mr. THORNLEY. It seemed to fit his personality.

Mr. JENNER. Would you read that? I lost the thought of it.

(The reporter read the answer.)

Mr. JENNER. Would you elaborate, please?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, Oswald was not militant. At the time it didn't seem
to me he was at all militant. That he was at all a fighter, the kind
of person who would glory in thinking of himself as marching along in
a great crusade of some kind. He would be the kind of person who would
take a quiet, as quiet as possible, for him personally, approach to
something. For example, going to the Soviet Union would be a way he
could experience what he thought were the benefits of communism without
committing himself to storming the Bastille, so to speak.

Mr. JENNER. Is it a fair statement that, in seeking to interpret or
enlarge upon what you say, that you did not have the impression of
him as being a person who thought in terms of seeking to implant in
this country, for example, by force or violence or other leadership,
communism or Marxism so as materially to affect or change the
government here?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I don't think he felt he had to do that. I think he
felt that that would inevitably happen some day and he was just getting
into the swing of things by doing things his way. I don't think he felt
that he could do much to promote the Communist cause or hinder it.

Mr. JENNER. Did he ever lead you to believe or did you have the
impression that he had any thought or desire or inclination to implant
communism here or elsewhere.

Mr. THORNLEY. No; not any more than merely to with the argument. He
certainly would have liked to have converted me or any other person
who was willing to discuss it with him. He would have liked to have
persuaded them that his ideas were correct. If he had done so, I have
no idea what he would have done then. I don't think he did either.

Mr. JENNER. What about his relationships, camaraderie with others on
base?

Mr. THORNLEY. Almost nil.

Mr. JENNER. Almost nil.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, he got along----

Mr. JENNER. Enlarge on that please.

Mr. THORNLEY. He got along with very few people.

Mr. JENNER. Why was that, in your opinion?

Mr. THORNLEY. He was extremely unpredictable. He and I stopped speaking
before I finally left the outfit. This will give you an example of----

Mr. JENNER. How did that arise?

Mr. THORNLEY. It was a Saturday morning. We had been called out to
march in a parade for a man or some men--I believe they were staff
NCO's--who were retiring from the Marine Corps. This was a common
occurrence. Every now and then we had to give up our Saturday morning
liberty to go march in one of these parades and everybody, of course,
having just gotten up, and having to stand out, to look forward to
a morning of standing out in the hot sun and marching around, was
irritable. So, we were involved at the moment in a "hurry-up and wait
routine" which is common in large organizations like the military. We
were waiting at the moment, in the parking lot by the parade ground,
sitting. Oswald and I happened to be sitting next to each other on a
log that was used to bank cars, in the parking lot. I had just finished
"1984" a couple of days earlier, and I had not yet discussed it with
Oswald, and I was--he said something and I said something; I don't
recall what it was--I was definitely thinking of "1984" at the time and
I was using terms from "1984." Oswald didn't seem to be particularly
amused by what I was saying, and he was--he seemed to be kind of lost
in his own thoughts, and so I stopped making any comments at all to him
for awhile. Then he turned to me and said something about the stupidity
of the parade, of the whole circumstance right at the moment, how angry
it made him, and I said, I believe my words were, "Well, comes the
revolution you will change all that."

At which time he looked at me like a betrayed Caesar and screamed,
screamed definitely, "Not you, too, Thornley." And I remember his voice
cracked as he said this. He was definitely disturbed at what I had said
and I didn't really think I had said that much. He put his hands in his
pockets and pulled his hat down over his eyes and walked away and went
over and sat down someplace else alone, and I thought, well, you know,
forget about it, and I never said anything to him again and he never
said anything to me again.

Mr. JENNER. You mean you never spoke to each other from that time on?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; and shortly thereafter I left the outfit for
overseas. I don't recall that we were ever in a situation where we
would have spoken, but I know we never spoke after that. And this
happened with many people, this reaction of Oswald's, and therefore
he had few friends. He never seemed to have any one friend for a long
length of time, one acquaintance. He seemed to guard against developing
real close friendships.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever--excuse me, you recall being interviewed by an
agent of the FBI?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. This was in New Orleans on Monday the 25th of----

Mr. THORNLEY. This was on an afternoon. Does he have the time down?

Mr. JENNER. 25th of November.

Mr. THORNLEY. That was Secret Service, wasn't it? Let's see, the 22d,
23d, 24th.

Mr. JENNER. This was Special Agent Merwin Alderson and Special Agent
Richard Farrell. It was the Monday following the assassination.

Mr. THORNLEY. What I believe happened is--I believe they arrived in
Arnaud's Restaurant where I was working at the time about midnight
Sunday night so it would actually be Monday, yes, sir, that they talked
to me. I gathered at the time these gentlemen were from the Secret
Service, but those are the gentlemen.

Mr. JENNER. Did you say to them in connection with this sudden
termination of the relationship between yourself and Oswald "that you
had made this comment to Oswald, that he was a Communist and that
things would be different when the revolution came"?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I didn't tell them he was a Communist; no. But
Oswald, certainly that was his reason for his anger. There was an
implied accusation of communism in my saying, "Comes the revolution you
will change all that."

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. THORNLEY. You see, he wasn't understanding the comments I was
making in relation to "1984" at all, our traditional meeting ground
here. He was interpreting them in light of his alleged communism, and
that is why he became angry. But no; I didn't say to him, "You are a
Communist"--ever.

Mr. JENNER. It is your explanation.

Mr. THORNLEY. This was not my opinion.

Mr. JENNER. You are saying that he interpreted your comment to be that
you accused him of being a Communist, and then he made the remark, "Not
you, too."

Mr. THORNLEY. I am sure he interpreted that that way but I certainly
didn't think he was a Communist and I certainly didn't tell him so.

Mr. JENNER. To what did you attribute this inability of his to maintain
reasonably cordial or at least military-service family relations with
his fellow marines?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, at the time I just thought--well, the man is a
nut--at the very moment it happened, I dismissed it without thinking
about it.

Mr. JENNER. See if you can articulate a little more, when you say "a
nut," a lot of people will interpret the expression "a nut" differently.

Mr. THORNLEY. I understand that. I was just trying to give you my
first impression first: that he was some kind of a nut, and I stopped
thinking about it.

Mr. JENNER. You mean a nut in the sense of an extremist, not an
organized thinker?

Mr. THORNLEY. I didn't think about that enough to classify it. I just
thought, "something is wrong with him, maybe something is bugging him
today, maybe he is crazy, I don't know what," but I just wasn't at that
moment--it wasn't that important to me, I didn't feel much better than
he did that morning, I am sure, so I just shrugged it off.

Later, I did reflect on it, and that, combined with his general
habits in relation to his superiors, and to the other men in the
outfit, caused me to decide that he had a definite tendency toward
irrationality at times, an emotional instability. Once again right
away, I didn't know exactly what was the cause of this. A couple of
years later I had good reason to think about it some more, at which
time I noticed----

Mr. JENNER. Now when please? Before the assassination?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, while working on my book, "The Idle Warriors."

Mr. JENNER. About when was this?

Mr. THORNLEY. From the time he went to the Soviet Union until February
of 1962.

Mr. JENNER. You learned that he had gone to the Soviet Union?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; I was stationed at his former outfit, Marine Air
Control Squadron 1, at the time he went to the Soviet Union.

Mr. JENNER. Where were you then stationed?

Mr. THORNLEY. That is where I was at the time.

Mr. JENNER. What country?

Mr. THORNLEY. At Atsugi, Japan.

Mr. JENNER. I see. And you learned about it through what source?

Mr. THORNLEY. The Stars and Stripes, the military newspaper in the
Far East. It was on page 3, I believe, a little article about Lee
Harvey Oswald having appeared in the American Embassy in Moscow,
having plopped down his passport and requested Soviet citizenship. My
first reaction was, "Good Lord, what is going on here?" And afterward,
I, of course--it began to occur to me, his interest in communism,
and I started kicking myself, thinking, well, you know, just for so
misjudging a person. I just----

Mr. JENNER. Misjudging? What respect, please?

Mr. THORNLEY. As far as his sincerity went. I did not ever think he was
so interested in communism to go to all the trouble to go to the Soviet
Union and certainly to jeopardize his citizenship, and so forth. This
was a great surprise to me. And right away I began to try to figure out
the mechanism of his thinking.

Mr. JENNER. I see. Keep going and tell me what your rationalization and
thinking was at that time.

Mr. THORNLEY. And what caused him to do this. This gets us back to the
emotional instability and why did it occur. I do believe, to begin
with, Oswald, how long ago he had acquired the idea I don't know, but I
think in his mind it was almost a certainty that the world would end up
under a totalitarian government or under totalitarian governments.

I think he accepted Orwell's premise in this that their was no fighting
it. That sooner or later you were going to have to love Big Brother and
I think this was the central, I think this was the central thing that
disturbed him and caused many of his other reactions.

I think he wanted to be on the winning side for one thing, and,
therefore, the great interest in communism. I think he wanted--I think
he felt he was under a totalitarian system while in the Marine Corps,
and, therefore, the extreme reactions when someone would call him a
Communist. I think he had a persecution complex, and I think he strove
to maintain it. I could not go so far as to say why. Perhaps it was
necessary to his self-esteem in some way. This was and is the general
conclusion I now have as to his general motivations, his overall
motivations, insofar as he has tended to be emotionally unstable.

Mr. JENNER. Do you think he was emotionally unstable?

Mr. THORNLEY. I think so.

Mr. JENNER. That is an opinion you gathered from your association with
him in the Marines.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes. Primarily once again from that last experience, that
short exchange and just the complete unexpectedness of it. And then, of
course, after that was when I learned some of the other things, such as
the pouring the beer over the staff sergeant's head. These things, I
don't know when I learned them, but I do definitely know I learned them
afterwards because I----

Mr. JENNER. You mean you learned of that incident after you left the
base at El Toro?

Mr. THORNLEY. I believe I learned it over in Japan, as a matter of
fact, I believe soon after I got there somebody mentioned it in some
connection or another, and that was because I remember, yes, I am sure
it happened over there because I remember, then I said, "Oh, he was in
this unit? He was in here in MACS 1?" and somebody said, "Yes." And
that was another connection in my mind as far as Oswald was concerned.

And then when the defection occurred, I therefore felt that I--I had
been thinking about writing a book on the Marine Corps. I had not
decided exactly what it was going to concern, what it was going to be
about as far as plot or theme went, the background would be the Marine
Corps in Japan, because that was the first big, at that time to me,
dramatic experience of my life suitable for a book, worth telling about.

So, when the defection occurred on that same day, I thought, "Well,
this is it. I am in a perfect position to tell how this took place, why
this happened." I was not so interested in explaining Lee Harvey Oswald
to myself or anybody else, as I was in explaining that particular
phenomenon of disillusionment with the United States after serving in
the Marine Corps overseas in a peacetime capacity; thus the title: The
Idle Warriors.

Since Oswald inspired the book, I did base a good deal of it as a
matter of convenience on his personality and on his ideas.

Mr. JENNER. You said you had the impression as you sat there in Japan
that here was a man whom you felt wanted to be on the winning side.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What impression did you have as to why? Did you, for
example, have the impression that he felt that his life had been such
that he had been deprived of the opportunity to be on a good side?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. That he conceived to be the leading side?

Mr. THORNLEY. No. I had a definite impression of why.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. THORNLEY. I think it is a mistake that many people make, and I
think it is a mistake he shared, and that is: he looked upon, not only
Marxists make this mistake, but he looked upon history as God. He
looked upon the eyes of future people as some kind of tribunal, and he
wanted to be on the winning side so that 10,000 years from now people
would look in the history books and say, "Well, this man was ahead of
his time. This man was"--he wanted to be looked back upon with honor
by future generations. It was, I think, a substitute, in his case, for
traditional religion.

The eyes of the future became what to another man would be the eyes of
God, or perhaps to yet another man the eyes of his own conscience.

Mr. JENNER. So it wasn't in the prosaic sense of merely wanting to be
on the "winning side."

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. When things developed----

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I don't think he expected things to develop within
his lifetime. I am sure that he didn't. He just wanted to be on the
winning side for all eternity.

Mr. JENNER. You had the impression that that was in terms of
selflessness? That he thought also in terms that Lee Harvey Oswald
would be associated with this forward thinking?

Mr. THORNLEY. Right. He was concerned with his image in history and I
do think that is why he chose once again, once again why he chose the
particular method he chose and did it in the way he did. It got him
in the newspapers. It did broadcast his name out. I think he probably
expected the Russians to accept him on a much higher--in a much higher
capacity than they did.

I think he expected them to, in his own dreams, to invite him to take a
position in their government, possibly as a technician, and I think he
then felt that he could go out into the world, into the Communist world
and distinguish himself and work his way up into the party, perhaps. He
was definitely----

Mr. JENNER. Did it have to be the Communist world or could it be any
world that he saw projected into the future?

Mr. THORNLEY. Definitely.

Mr. JENNER. And as you put it this, in your opinion, had become a
religion with him.

Mr. THORNLEY. Much more than he himself realized even though he called
it his religion.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have the impression there was a personal
selflessness, that is a--I will put it in terms of disregard or rather
this way--that as far as his physical person was concerned, he wasn't
concerned about life in the sense that he wanted to continue to
maintain life in his body?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I think he wanted physical happiness. I think this
is why he didn't do something like just join the Communist Party.
I believe he felt that was dangerous. I think he wanted to live
comfortably. But I think if it came to a choice between the two, or
to put it this way, more relevant to events that developed later, I
think if it became to his mind impossible for him to have this degree
of physical comfort that he expected or sought, I think he would then
throw himself entirely on the other thing he also wanted, which was the
image in history.

I don't think that--I think he wanted both if he could have them. If he
didn't, he wanted to die with the knowledge that, or with the idea that
he was somebody.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have the impression at any time that he, in turn,
embraced a realization that he was lacking in ability to accomplish the
former, that is, personal comfort and status, that is that he felt that
there was a lack of ability, capacity, training, education on his part?

Mr. THORNLEY. When I knew him, I don't think he had the vaguest thought
in that direction. I do definitely, of course, based solely upon what
I have read in the newspapers, think he came to that moment, after
returning to the United States from the Soviet Union. I think he was
getting panicky.

Mr. JENNER. In our discussion you can see it is important to me
to obtain your thinking, uninfluenced to the extent you can do it
by subsequent events. Of course complete lack of influence is not
possible, but I am seeking your views as to your state of mind prior to
November 22.

Mr. THORNLEY. All right. I would say that prior to November 22, I felt
that he had gradually become disillusioned with the United States for
many reasons, at the bottom was also his conviction, well, in fact,
his disillusionment with the United States in the Far East probably
contributed to some extent to his conviction that the Communists would
eventually prevail, the Communist culture would eventually prevail in
the world, and I then had the feeling that he certainly--I thought he
would probably stay in Russia, for example, forever.

I didn't know what he was doing there. I realized from what I read at
that time that he was not--he did not have Russian citizenship. He was
staying there as an immigrant. I expected him probably to adjust to
Russian life and that would be the last that the Western World would
ever hear of Oswald.

Everything Oswald has ever done has surprised me.

Mr. JENNER. Please elaborate on that.

Mr. THORNLEY. When I knew him and since I knew him, when I knew him I
was surprised when he was offended at my statement about the coming
of the revolution that Saturday morning. I was surprised when I read
in the papers overseas that he had gone to the Soviet Union. I was
surprised when he came back. And I was entirely caught unaware when it
turned out that he was involved in the assassination, to such an extent
that for some time afterwards, I thought he was innocent.

Mr. JENNER. Why were you surprised when he came back and tell us before
you do that where were you and how did you find out about it.

Mr. THORNLEY. I was in New Orleans. My parents sent me an article from
the Los Angeles Times about it. The reason I was surprised at his
coming back was as I said before, I just expected that would be the
last I would hear of him. I fully expected him to adjust to Soviet
life. I thought what he--at that time I thought what he probably
lacked in the Marine Corps was any sympathy for the overall purpose of
the Marine Corps. Whereas he certainly had sympathy for the overall
purpose of the Soviet Government, so I don't think he would mind the
restrictions imposed on him, as he resented them in the Marine Corps.

I did not expect him to become disillusioned, certainly, with
the Soviet Union. I am not, of course, sure that he did become
disillusioned with it. It just seemed unlike him to come back to this
country when he said he would never live in either as a capitalist or
as a worker.

Mr. JENNER. When did he say that?

Mr. THORNLEY. He said that at a press conference in Moscow according to
the papers.

Mr. JENNER. This was something you read in the Stars and Stripes?

Mr. THORNLEY. I don't know whether I read this in the Stars and
Stripes or whether I read this--I certainly read it when he came back
from Russia, I remember. It was in the article from the Times my
folks sent me. Said when he had left for the Soviet Union he had said
such-and-such, quote.

Mr. JENNER. You said you did not expect him to become disillusioned
with Soviet Russia. Was it your impression at any time, take the
several stages, that he had a conviction with respect to any form of
political philosophy or government?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, he did definitely always before and after have a
Marxist bias. From anything that has come to me, that has never--I have
never reason--never had reason to doubt that.

Mr. JENNER. That, you think, was a conviction?

Mr. THORNLEY. I think that was an irrevocable conviction, you might say.

Mr. JENNER. You do not think it was not merely a theoretical concept
which he used for argumentation?

Mr. THORNLEY. Let me put it this way. I think you could sit down and
argue with him for a number of years in a great marathon argument
and have piles of facts and I don't think you could have changed his
mind on that unless you knew why he believed it in the first place. I
certainly don't. I don't think with any kind of formal argument you
could have shaken that conviction. And that is why I say irrevocable.
It was just--never getting back to looking at things from any other way
once he had become a Marxist, whenever that was.

Mr. JENNER. Was he able to articulate distinctions between Marxism,
communism, capitalism, democracy?

Mr. THORNLEY. At the time I knew him and argued with him he didn't
bother to articulate distinctions between Marxism and communism. At a
latter time I understand he did.

Mr. JENNER. He attempted to.

Mr. THORNLEY. At the time I knew his communism was the modern, living
vicar of Marxism, period.

Mr. JENNER. Were you in New Orleans when he was arrested for
distributing Fair Play for Cuba Committee leaflets?

Mr. THORNLEY. I arrived in New Orleans in the early part of September.
If I was in New Orleans----

Mr. JENNER. 1963?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. This occurred in August of 1963.

Mr. THORNLEY. Then I wasn't there; no.

Mr. JENNER. Did you hear about it?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I didn't. I didn't hear about it until after the
assassination.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever hear any of those tapes?

Mr. THORNLEY. I heard part of one of them after the assassination, once
again.

Mr. JENNER. Did that part include his effort to distinguish between
Marxism and democracy in response to a question put to him by either
Mr. Stuckey or one of the other participants?

Mr. THORNLEY. That is exactly what he was talking about at the time. I
happened to be standing in the television station in New Orleans and he
was saying, and I just got a snatch of it, I was passing through the
room or something; and he was saying, "Well, there are many Marxist
countries in the world today."

Mr. JENNER. This was by way of his answering a question as to what was
the distinction between Marxism and communism?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; he was saying there are many non-Communist Marxist
countries in the world today and he was definitely making a distinction
between Marxism and communism.

Mr. JENNER. But all he did was to cite the countries. He didn't attempt
to make the distinction.

Mr. THORNLEY. It was only a snatch of it.

Mr. JENNER. That was a fair representation of his utterances during
those two radio broadcasts and one television broadcast. You mentioned
also that you had a feeling on his part that he was laboring under a
persecution complex?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That was not necessarily based alone on the incident
you relate that occurred on that Saturday morning? Were there other
incidents?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; there were many comments on his part about the walls
having ears, about--I think he felt the Marine Corps kept a pretty
close watch on him because of his "subversive" activities and, for that
reason in fact, I think he sought to keep himself convinced that he was
being watched and being pushed a little harder than anyone else.

I don't think he was consciously, perhaps not consciously, aware of the
fact that he went out of his way to get into trouble. I think it was
kind of necessary to him to believe that he was being picked on. It
wasn't anything extreme. I wouldn't go so far as to call it, call him a
paranoid, but a definite tendency there was in that direction, I think.

Mr. JENNER. Would you put it in terms that he had the feeling that he
was being unjustifiably put upon?

Mr. THORNLEY. Oh, always; yes. He was, in fact, you almost got the
feeling that he was--this was happening because of his defense. I mean
he was always speaking of the injustices which had been perpetrated
against him.

Mr. JENNER. Of his injustices as to him personally, different from the
treatment of others about him?

Mr. THORNLEY. To him personally; yes. Well, and it was the fact that he
had lost his clearance, and had gone out of his way to get into some
degree of trouble that went on to support this. For example, we would
stand at muster in the morning, and Sergeant Spar would call the roll
and he would say "Oswald" and Oswald would step out of the ranks and he
would send him off to mow the lawn or something.

Oswald did get special treatment. As I say, he had brought it on
himself but he made the most of it, too, as far as using it as a means
of getting or attempting to get sympathy.

Mr. JENNER. Well, what was the sergeant's name?

Mr. THORNLEY. Sergeant Spar.

Mr. JENNER. Spar. In using his name, I don't wish to, I am not
suggesting anything personal as to Sergeant Spar, but I am going to
use him as a faceless Marine sergeant.

Mr. THORNLEY. And a very good one.

Mr. JENNER. You marines, at least some of you, I assume, as had GI's
and others, you buttered up sergeants, too, didn't you, in order to
avoid being assigned too often to disagreeable tasks?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; you didn't have to. So long as you kept in line
and obeyed orders, you didn't have to--you weren't assigned any
disagreeable task in the kind of outfit I was in because there weren't
that many. When there was a disagreeable task to be done, it was
assigned to somebody who had stepped out of line and there were always
enough people who had stepped out of line and it was no problem to find
them. In fact, the problem was to find enough disagreeable tasks to go
around. The only exception to this would be overseas; a typhoon would
hit sometimes and then everybody would have to go out and we would have
to all, much to our dismay, wade around at 2 o'clock in the morning and
tear down tents and so on and so forth.

Mr. JENNER. That was a thing that was common to all of you.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. It was not a disagreeable task in the sense we are talking
about.

Mr. THORNLEY. Right; and that was never necessary to have to butter
up that I can ever think of to a superior of any kind in order to get
exempted from anything.

Mr. JENNER. Well, do you think Oswald was aware that all he had to be
was more tractable to the customs and practices of the Marine Corps
in which he was then living and he would not be assigned disagreeable
tasks more often than others?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, that is hard to say. I don't know whether he was
aware of that or not. I am not sure whether he permitted himself to be
aware of it. Maybe he was aware of it and maybe he couldn't help. He
had compulsions to do these things. Maybe he thought it was worth it
and maybe he didn't feel that he was being treated unjustly at all.
Maybe he just wanted everybody to think he felt he was being treated
unjustly, if you follow me.

Mr. JENNER. I do.

Mr. THORNLEY. It could have been any of these things. This--I think it
would take a good psychiatrist to find out which.

Mr. JENNER. You also used the expression that he strove to maintain the
status or milieu in which he had brought himself.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; I think this was possibly so. I think perhaps the
feeling of being persecuted was necessary to his self-esteem. This is,
I understand, a common thing, and it certainly fits in with everything
else I know about him.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have that impression that you have just expressed
at the time that you were associated with him in the Marines?

Mr. THORNLEY. At the time I was associated with him, I didn't have that
impression because I was too busy wondering just what it was. I used
to--I would see him doing something stupid, maybe a wisecrack to an
officer, for example, and I would say, "Well, doesn't the idiot know
that if he does that he is going to have to do this" and yet he would
resent his punishment.

Mr. JENNER. What would he do afterward?

Mr. THORNLEY. As if it had been thrust upon him for no reason
whatsoever, out of the blue.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have a feeling that he was impulsive in that
respect, in the sense that sometimes he did things?

Mr. THORNLEY. He was definitely impulsive.

Mr. JENNER. That he had no control?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I don't know whether he had no control or whether
he would just do things without thinking. I think maybe he just let,
relaxed his controls once in a while, and why, I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have the feeling he was impulsive?

Mr. THORNLEY. Oh, definitely.

Mr. JENNER. He acted on the spur of the moment?

Mr. THORNLEY. He was spontaneous, very much so. This was--I had this
impression the whole time I knew him.

Mr. JENNER. You did have the impression and I think you have mentioned
it several times, that he had an exaggerated, either mild or otherwise,
self-esteem.

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I didn't mention that that I recall. I did say that
I think maintaining the persecution complex was necessary for his
self-esteem and he was concerned very much with his image in history
but I don't think in the sense of being secure about his self-esteem; I
don't think he was either conceited, for example, egotistical, or just
plain confident. I don't think--I don't have any reason to believe that
he in his own eyes, had any reason to be proud of himself beyond the
average, at most.

Mr. JENNER. I wasn't thinking of self-esteem in that sense and I didn't
gather from your remark that you were thinking of it in that sense
either, but rather in the sense of self-esteem in his own eyes, not in
the sense of accomplishment or egoism.

Mr. THORNLEY. Now, I don't know. Self-esteem in one's own eyes, it
seems to me, would have to be justified by some means. Some people
justify it by means of their attraction to the opposite sex or by means
of their standing in some country club. I think Oswald justified it by
means of his recalcitrance, kind of a reverse self-esteem.

By means of his unwillingness to do what he was ordered, for example.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have the feeling that he sought the esteem of
others, not necessarily his officers, but the esteem of somebody or
some group or some persons about him and in his life----

Mr. THORNLEY. I think he wanted this very much but I don't think he
knew how to go about getting it. He wanted it, and yet he certainly
didn't--I think he would have felt he was cheating himself if he had
offered them anything in exchange for it. He wanted it but he wanted it
to come to him for no reason. He didn't want to have to earn it. I got
that impression. That is a very mild impression.

Mr. JENNER. We are dealing in a very delicate field here and I am
pressing you very severely.

Mr. THORNLEY. These are sometimes very gray, thin lines we have to
distinguish between.

Mr. JENNER. We are probing for motivation. Did you ever discuss with
him the matter of education?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. His own; or education in the abstract; or the need for
education in order to attain accomplishments; or any regard to whether
his status in life, his personal comfort, his personal peace, could be
advanced by further education?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever have the feeling of any discomfort on his part
or inferiority because of his limited education?

Mr. THORNLEY. No. First of all, in the Marine Corps there is a
prevalence of this kind of feeling among many of the enlisted men, and
Oswald was exempt from it.

Mr. JENNER. What do you mean "exempt from it"?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, he didn't, for example, have the usual bitterness
toward somebody who read, well, just merely because he did read.

Mr. JENNER. He may have felt superior because he did read, did you have
that feeling?

Mr. THORNLEY. Oh, yes.

Mr. JENNER. That was a definite feeling?

Mr. THORNLEY. I wouldn't say anything in my experience with him caused
me to particularly notice that he felt superior because he did read.
But except, yes, there is one time a friend of his, I don't know who
it was, I haven't been able to recall the name at present, one morning
looked over at our commanding officer who was walking by, Colonel
Poindexter, an air ace in Korea----

Mr. JENNER. A what?

Mr. THORNLEY. An ace pilot in Korea, and made the comment, "There goes
a mental midgit" which drew glee from Oswald, as I remember. But aside
from that one particular incident--well, in any case, when he was
dealing with military superiors he always felt superior to them. You
got that impression. But dealing with the other marines who maybe did
have an education or did not have an education, I didn't get any, ever
get any impression one way or the other that he had a tendency to react
to this.

Mr. JENNER. As between yourself and him, your association, what was
your feeling? Did he regard himself as compatible with you and you with
him?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; definitely. I didn't get any idea that he was--I
thought his education was about the same as my own which certainly
isn't spectacular by any means. I thought he might have had a year of
college. I knew he had--I figured he had graduated from high school. It
never occurred to me to think any more about it. I did, as I mentioned
before, notice once in a while that he had gaps in his knowledge, but
many people do, in fact all of us do, I am sure, in some fields.

But in Oswald's case they perhaps had an unusual pattern to them or
something that made me notice them, perhaps. Perhaps he was better
read, for example, on Marxist economics than any other school of
economics, things like this. But that was the extent of it.

Mr. JENNER. Was there in your kicking around with him in your
discussions--was there ever any discussion of your past, of his past,
his life?

Mr. THORNLEY. None whatsoever. This I am almost certain of. I had no
idea, for example, that he was from Texas or where he was from. At that
time I don't recall him having a Texas accent, either. I had no idea
that his father had died when he was young. I had no idea about his
family, anything along this line and I don't think I ever discussed my
past with him.

Mr. JENNER. Was any mention ever made of his attendance at or even the
name of the Albert Schweitzer College?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. No discussions about any plans of his or possibility of his
seeking further education of any kind or character when he was mustered
out of the Marines?

Mr. THORNLEY. None whatsoever. For one thing we were not close enough
friends to have any personal interests in each other. I looked upon
him as somebody to argue with, another atheist--therefore, without the
problem of religion between us--and to argue philosophy and politics
about, and I think he looked upon me in about the same light.

Mr. JENNER. What was your dexterity with Marine weapons?

Mr. THORNLEY. Mine?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. THORNLEY. I was a sharpshooter.

Mr. JENNER. What was his?

Mr. THORNLEY. I believe--well, at that time I didn't know.

Mr. JENNER. You didn't know. I want your viewpoint as of that time.
While you were based at El Toro, did the unit engage with any
regularity in rifle practice?

Mr. THORNLEY. None whatsoever. At that time, the whole time I was
there, we did not engage in rifle practice.

Mr. JENNER. As a matter of curiosity on my own part, why was that?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, in the Marine Corps you are required once a year
to go to the rifle range and qualify. I was not there an entire year.
Point No. 2, this was the Marine air wing which has much less of an
emphasis on, in general, on rifle practice because it is not going to
be utilized in battle, and a much stronger emphasis, in the case of the
outfit we were in, on our particular military occupational specialty.

Mr. JENNER. Which was?

Mr. THORNLEY. 6749 Aviation Electronic Operator.

Mr. JENNER. Was this true when you reached Japan?

Mr. THORNLEY. More so. When I reached Japan, however, we did go to the
rifle range one time shortly after I got there, and qualify. I recall
at that time that in Japan we weren't even having rifle inspections.
There you could put your rifle away in your locker and forget about it,
and take it out every couple of months and make sure it hadn't corroded
away, and put it back again.

Mr. JENNER. But you didn't even have rifle inspection?

Mr. THORNLEY. Once in a while we would have one, but not with any
frequency whatsoever.

Mr. JENNER. Were you forewarned so that you could clean your rifle?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; usually you were caught unawares, which was why you
kept it clean in the locker.

Mr. JENNER. I see. What are the grades of marksmanship?

Mr. THORNLEY. Marksman, sharpshooter, and expert.

Mr. JENNER. Marksman, sharpshooter, and expert. Therefore, I gather
from that that marksman was the basic grade.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. A grade that every marine was expected to, and had to,
attain that grade?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not had to attain, some didn't, and there was no
particular penalty involved, except maybe something a little
extracurricular when you were in boot camp. Otherwise, you didn't
wear a marksman's medal is all. You didn't have any qualification in
the infantry; of course, it would be looked down upon in the case of
promotion or something like that. In the air wing it had much slighter
significance than that. Maybe if you were being considered for a
meritorious promotion and you hadn't qualified you wouldn't get it, but
day to day it had no significance.

Mr. JENNER. Were the standards applied in the air wing with respect
to qualifications for these three classes as severe or as high as the
standards applied, let us say, in the Marine infantry?

Mr. THORNLEY. Exactly the same; yes.

Mr. JENNER. Exactly the same. Would you please state for me your
concept of the degree of marksmanship for (a) marksman, (b)
sharpshooter, (c) expert?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, a marksman is an average shooter. A man, I think,
could pick up a rifle and with a little commonsense and a minimum
knowledge of the basics of marksmanship qualify as a marksman. When a
man doesn't qualify as a marksman it is usually either because he is
nervous on the day of qualification or he is gun shy or some outside
influence confuses him; maybe he gets his windage off, something like
this.

Sharpshooter is just a little above average. It ranges over about--a
pretty wide field. But it is a man who--a sharpshooter would be a man,
the average man, with a good, maybe a week of training on how to use a
rifle, and some practice.

Whereas an expert is the kind of man I would hate to have on the other
side in a war. He is accurate with his rifle up to and including 500
yards in a number of different positions. Hits the bull's-eye or close
to the bull's-eye an overwhelming percentage of the time.

Mr. JENNER. Is that the category in which we would place that to which
we refer generally as the sniper?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes. Well, any man might be assigned as a sniper, I
imagine. But an expert rifleman would perform much better.

Mr. JENNER. Maybe be a superior sniper.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes. Definitely.

Mr. JENNER. And to attain the position of expert marksman must there be
considerable practice and use of the weapon or is it more of natural
ability?

Mr. THORNLEY. Now, you enter in once again to natural ability, just as
not qualifying might be caused by a lack of natural ability of some
kind. An expert rifleman probably would have a much calmer nervous
system or, you might say, a much greater degree of control.

I would imagine training can make up for this. I know a couple of times
I just missed expert by a few points. It seemed that I couldn't make
expert. It seemed to me there was just something I didn't have in order
to make expert. It was very frustrating.

Mr. JENNER. You tried?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; it takes a great degree of control, primarily. Of
course, the other things like good eyesight and so on and so forth.

Mr. JENNER. Oh, yes.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever discuss with Oswald his degree of proficiency
in the use of the rifle?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not to the best of my knowledge.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have any impressions that you gathered in that
respect while you were with him at El Toro?

Mr. THORNLEY. None whatsoever. Had somebody asked me to guess about
Oswald, I would have said, well, he probably didn't qualify, just
because that was the type of guy he was, but that is all.

Mr. JENNER. You would never have expected him to have been a
sharpshooter, for example?

Mr. THORNLEY. It wouldn't have greatly surprised me if he was and it
wouldn't have greatly surprised me if he wasn't. This is something very
difficult: to look at a man and tell, at least it is very difficult for
me. I have seen some drill instructors who could do it. But to tell
whether he is going to be an expert or a sharpshooter, marksman, I am
not qualified.

Mr. JENNER. While you were stationed with him at El Toro, did you ever
go off base with him?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever have any discussion of dates?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. His attitude toward women?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Sex?

Mr. THORNLEY. None whatsoever.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any scuttlebutt around the camp in that regard
with respect to him?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not to the best of my knowledge.

Mr. JENNER. Sex habits, propensities?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; you stand a risk in the Marine Corps, if you are
at all quiet and tend to be introverted, of being suspected of being
homosexual, but to the best of my knowledge there were never any
comments made of this nature.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall some other readings of his in addition to
"1984"?

Mr. THORNLEY. I do recall having mentioned Dostoievsky to him and I
know he had read something and I think it was "Crime and Punishment"
but I am not sure. It was something I had not read by Dostoievsky when
I had read about, I guess at that time, about three or four books.

Mr. JENNER. It is a great book.

Mr. THORNLEY. Someday I am going to get around to it.

Mr. JENNER. Have you not read it yet? It is a really great book.

Mr. THORNLEY. No; and I don't recall him mentioning any other books
offhand. I don't--I can't think of a thing besides "1984" and some book
by Dostoievsky.

Mr. JENNER. While you were based at El Toro did he engage, did you
notice, in any officer baiting on his part with respect, in particular,
to such matters as foreign affairs?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; not on foreign affairs, no, but the same officer,
Lieutenant Donovan, spoke of in a foreign affairs lecture in the
newspapers, I do remember him baiting him on a couple of occasions.

Mr. JENNER. Oswald attempting to bait Lieutenant Donovan?

Mr. THORNLEY. I don't remember what it was. I know, I believe
Lieutenant Donovan was also a lieutenant which I had had a couple of
run-ins with if I remember correctly.

If not, it was Lieutenant Delprado. It was one of the two of them. Mine
were completely accidental and I went to great length to keep away from
one of them because it seemed like any time I was around him I happened
to do something to irritate him. But Oswald, I don't recall exactly
what he said, but he a couple or three times went out of his way to
say something to one of these lieutenants that would cause them to be
irritated and in this you can't really say that he was exceptional. It
happened many times. In Oswald's case though, it was exceptionally----

Mr. JENNER. You mean it happened many times with respect to other
noncoms in the Marines with respect to these officers?

Mr. THORNLEY. Right; but in Oswald's case it seemed a little more
deliberate. Some guys would get mad and they would say something,
or sometimes they would do something by accident, and they would get
themselves involved and then they would decide, "Well, what the hell,"
and push it all away. Oswald it seemed didn't have to have any reason.
He just told an officer to get lost.

Mr. JENNER. He baited an officer for the pleasure of it?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; I might mention that this was one means by which he
won the admiration of others in the outfit in that the junior officers
especially are usually disliked, or were in that outfit, and this made
him on such occasions as he engaged with an officer in some kind of
officer baiting, this won the respect, for at least a few minutes, of
the men--who would kind of laugh about it, and chuckle over it and tell
others about it. Perhaps this is why he did it.

Mr. JENNER. You mentioned some slovenliness on his part; what about his
quarters, his barracks; did you have occasion to observe them?

Mr. THORNLEY. I don't think I was ever in his barracks. I do recall
having been told that he had Russian books and that is all I--that is
the only connection I can make now in my mind with his quarters. I
don't think I ever saw them.

Mr. JENNER. You already have given us something of his view of the
U.S. Marine Corps. Would you give us a summary of that? Give us your
impression of his views with respect to the U.S. Marine Corps.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, definitely the Marine Corps was not what he had
expected it to be when he joined. Also he felt that the officers and
the staff NCO's at the Marine Corps were incompetent to give him orders.

Mr. JENNER. Incompetent in what sense, they were below him
intellectually?

Mr. THORNLEY. They were below him intellectually--and for various other
reasons in each case, too. Maybe this officer was ignorant, as was
brought out about foreign affairs, in Oswald's mind, knew less than
Oswald did about it. I don't hold with the stand that Oswald would
study up on foreign affairs simply in order to bait the officer. I
think it just happened to be that Oswald would see that the officer
was basing his foreign affairs maybe on Time magazine when Oswald had
done a little more reading and I think he resented this Time magazine
approach to foreign affairs.

Mr. JENNER. How did these discussions arise, Mr. Thornley, the
discussion of foreign affairs by officers?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, the officers, every so many weeks--this is
mentioned somewhere in this pile of papers--every so many weeks a
lieutenant is appointed to give a foreign affairs lecture or a current
affairs lecture, pardon me, to the troops, at which time he explains
the world situation in a half hour. I remember having one second
lieutenant telling us about Dalai Lama or it was a first lieutenant
and I forget what he told us, but it was something completely absurd.
I think at that time the Dalai Lama had just disappeared or something,
and one would get the impression, I think, that he thought the Dalai
Lama was a leader in Pakistan or something.

Mr. JENNER. That is the impression the lieutenant tried to convey?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, I think that was the impression the lieutenant had
had when he had been assigned to give this lecture. The last minute,
he got down and started going through the news magazines to get his
information, got it somewhat inaccurately, and didn't particularly care
whether it was accurate or not anyway. Stood up in front of the troops
and reeled off the lecture, and, of course, most of the enlisted men
didn't know enough to criticize him either because they weren't that
interested, and that was it--with a couple of people laughing up their
sleeves, and this happened later, this didn't happen at the time I knew
Oswald.

However, in such a situation Oswald would have been careful I am sure
to raise his hand and correct the lieutenant.

Mr. JENNER. I was going to get to that. During the course of these
lectures did the troops as you called them engage in discussion with
the instructor?

Mr. THORNLEY. They were permitted to ask questions, to raise their
hands to ask questions. And Oswald would have probably asked a question
which would have made light of the lieutenant's ignorance.

Mr. JENNER. Put the lieutenant at a disadvantage?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Were you present at any times when you were at El Toro
when the lectures occurred when, at that time Oswald raised his hand
and engaged in dissertation?

Mr. THORNLEY. I might have been but I don't recall it if I was. I
recall being present at several lectures at El Toro, and it just might
have happened. It was the kind of thing Oswald would do and it wouldn't
even have phased me. I probably wouldn't even have bothered to remember
if it had happened. It would have been just part of the daily routine
there so I would have----

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever engage in that sort of thing?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I never had guts enough to stand up and tell an
officer he didn't know what he was talking about. Behind his back I
might tell somebody that such-and-such officer didn't know what he was
talking about, but I was never quite that brash--in that particular
respect, anyway.

Mr. JENNER. What were your impressions on Oswald being interested in
music?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not being interested in music myself particularly----

Mr. JENNER. I take it you had none; that is, any impressions as to his
interests?

Mr. THORNLEY. No, therefore, I had none; correct.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever play chess with him?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see him playing chess with anyone else?

Mr. THORNLEY. Just now you mentioned the word "chess" as a definite
association; I think he did play chess. I can't place the person.
This--there were some other people in the outfit who played chess.
There is one name I have been trying to remember for a long time, and I
think it starts with "Win" something. "Winter" something. I'm probably
way off base there. But a tall blond corporal, I believe, played chess
and a couple of other men in the outfit played chess. At that time, I
guess at that, I knew how to play chess. I have never been particularly
interested, though, in the game so I don't--I am pretty sure I didn't
play chess with him.

In fact, come to think of it I had just been cured of playing chess 3
months before that; somebody beat me in about six moves and I stopped
playing for about a year. It wasn't me.

Mr. JENNER. While at El Toro did Oswald become engaged in any physical
altercations with anybody?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; definitely not to my knowledge. Never got into any
fights or even any hot personal argument over anything, that I know of.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression, if you had one then, as to his
disposition in that regard?

Mr. THORNLEY. I had the impression that he avoided violence.

Mr. JENNER. While you were at El Toro do you recall whether Oswald ever
went off the base on liberty?

Mr. THORNLEY. As far as I know he didn't.

Mr. JENNER. Were there any discussions on the base as to what, if
anything, Oswald did?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not in my presence.

Mr. JENNER. What, if anything, Oswald had done off the base on liberty?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not in my presence.

Mr. JENNER. Was there ever any discussion of Cuba and Castro and that
problem?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. All right; tell us all about that.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, at that time I and Oswald were both, and a couple
of other men in the outfit, were quite sure that Castro was a great
hero.

Mr. JENNER. Why?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, he was liberating Cuba from Batista and, of course,
we had heard all about Batista and what an evil man he was, which I am
sure was true, and most of us had read some of the things written by
Castro, some of Castro's promises--such as he would take no part in the
government after the revolution, such things--so we had the definite
impression--I remember there was one Puerto Rican boy, myself, Oswald,
a couple of others who had quite an admiration for Castro, and thought
the pro-Communist statements he was or might be making at the time,
were made simply to guarantee a little more independence for his island
because it was located so close to the United States.

In other words, I felt at the time he was playing both ends against the
middle in order to go his own way, something like Charles de Gaulle
is doing right now by recognizing Red China. I felt it was purely
statesmanship, statecraft, power politics. I didn't feel that Castro
was a dedicated Communist. Whether Oswald did or not I don't know. He
admired Castro because of the social reforms Castro was introducing. So
did I at that time.

Delgado, the Puerto Rican boy, as I recall it, was becoming worried
at that time because he was beginning to think maybe Castro was
communistic. I didn't think so. Oswald, as far as I know, didn't have
anything to say on that matter. And that is about all I can tell you.

Mr. JENNER. Well, you say that you admired Castro and you knew Oswald
admired Castro. Tell us on what you base that comment.

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, once again as I remember, there was one of these
afternoon discussions once again, and somebody was saying something,
worried about Castro, it might have been Delgado, it might have been
somebody else, I don't think it was Delgado that day because I think
he was defending Castro, somebody said something against Castro, and
Oswald said that he didn't think Castro was so bad.

He thought Castro was good for Cuba, and they said why, and I took up
the argument, which was the argument I just gave you, the naive idea
I had at the time that he was playing for independence, and Oswald
remained silent, shaking his head affirmatively a couple of times, and
that was it.

Mr. JENNER. Shaking his head affirmatively with respect to the comments
you were making?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; to my argument, to my justification of Castro.

Mr. JENNER. But you recall no provocative remarks that he made in that
connection?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Did Oswald have a nickname?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not that I know of except Oz sometimes.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever hear him referred to as "Ozzie Rabbit"?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, yes; I didn't realize that anybody else referred to
him as such but I always thought of him as such. He reminded me very
much of a cartoon character at that time. It was kind of pathetic.
There was something about this little smile of his, and his expression
on his face and the shape of his head, just the general, his general
appearance established a definite association in my mind with some
Warner Bros. cartoon character, I believe Warner Bros. And I, very
recently, in a discussion with someone, describing Oswald mentioned
that he reminded you of--I said: "I think there is a character called
Oswald Rabbit who appears in movie cartoons." And they shook their head.

Now, I know where I got that particular example so I probably heard him
referred to as "Ozzie Rabbit," though I don't recall specifically.

Mr. JENNER. Did he occasionally have a nickname or a reference made to
him attendant upon his interest in the study of the Russian language or
his interest in communism or in Russia or Soviet----

Mr. THORNLEY. Only he was sometimes called the Communist and he would,
sometimes I know--as far as his study of the Russian language went he
made no attempt to hide this.

In fact, he made--would make attempts to show it off by speaking a
little Russian.

Mr. JENNER. He was proud of that, was he?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; there was someone else in the outfit who spoke
Russian, don't ask me who, they used to exchange a few comments in the
morning at muster and say hello to each other or something, and he also
would make jokes in Russian, not in Russian, but in English, in a thick
Russian accent many times; this was very typical of him.

Mr. JENNER. He resorted to that area and use of satire?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; until I had made the comment that implied he was a
Communist, I had no idea----

Mr. JENNER. That he was sensitive?

Mr. THORNLEY. That he was sensitive about it because he didn't seem to
be.

Mr. JENNER. Did he have any visitors?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not that I recall.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion at anytime about the possibility
of his going to Russia?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. This was a complete surprise to you when you saw it in
Stars and Stripes?

Mr. THORNLEY. Somebody would say to him, "Why don't you go and live in
Russia," in the middle of an argument.

Mr. JENNER. I didn't mean that in that sense but did he volunteer a
statement on his part about his going to Russia?

Mr. THORNLEY. Never anything; no.

Mr. JENNER. I take it it was your opinion he was not a Communist at the
time he was assigned to El Toro?

Mr. THORNLEY. That was my opinion.

Mr. JENNER. I take it you have never seen or talked with Oswald
subsequent to the time he left or you left for Japan, from El Toro?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. That is, my statement is correct.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. It follows, I take it, that you were never aware that he
was in New Orleans when you were there?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; I wasn't.

Mr. JENNER. You were not aware of his comings and goings other than the
newspaper report that your folks sent you?

Mr. THORNLEY. I was aware that he had come back from the Soviet Union
and gone to Dallas, and I know I at that time did think about going
to see him in Dallas for the book, to find out just why he did go to
Russia, to check it with my own theory.

Mr. JENNER. I am going to get to that in due course.

Mr. THORNLEY. But aside from knowing that he came back and went to live
in Dallas with a Russian wife and a child I had no idea of his comings
or goings.

Mr. JENNER. At the time you had some notion of going to Dallas to see
him or Fort Worth, as the case might be, it was with respect to the
book you have talked about you were then in the process of writing or
fulminating about?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; it was practically--well, it was finished by that
time but I was thinking about, I was definitely planning to rewrite it.
I didn't know how soon, and I thought before I did rewrite it I would
go talk to him and see what he could tell me about. There were a lot of
gaps in the book, and in the book I was not able to explain how he got
from the United States to Russia and things like that. A lot of things
I wanted to check out and I thought if I could get him to cooperate
with me, perhaps not even in telling him I was writing the book, I
could get the information I wanted.

Mr. JENNER. And this was the state of mind you had after you had heard
that he returned to the United States?

Mr. THORNLEY. Right.

Mr. JENNER. Which was June of 1962, when he returned?

Mr. THORNLEY. Right, and I had finished the book in February.

Mr. JENNER. Of 1963?

Mr. THORNLEY. 1962.

Mr. JENNER. 1962. You were in Mexico and Mexico City in 1963?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Cover that for us. What was the motivation, the length of
the trip?

Mr. THORNLEY. I will have to begin at the beginning on that. On April
17, my parents sent me a gift of $100 on the condition that I spend it
for a bus ticket to visit them that summer. Which I did, and I left
around--well, I arrived in California on May 5. I remember going along
the border and seeing fireworks on the other side of the border.

Mr. JENNER. What border?

Mr. THORNLEY. From Yuma to San Diego.

Mr. JENNER. Mexican border?

Mr. THORNLEY. That is Cinco De Mayo. I arrived in California on May
5 and I stayed there until late August. Now, I think in one of these
reports that I gave to the FBI the information might be different.
Since then I have checked with notebooks that I kept of my activity,
and I was on my way back to New Orleans in late August. I went by way
of Mexico City because I have taken 5 years of Spanish in school and I
never had the opportunity to live in an environment where I would have
to use it, depend on it solely, and I wanted to see how I would do. I
have always wanted to visit Mexico, to see Mexico City. I checked into
the prices. I had found out I had enough money that I would be able to
go down to Mexico City and stay a short while.

So I went down there for about a week, actually it was 6 days I spent
within Mexico, from Tijuana to Mexico City, on a Mexican bus, and
then when my money began to run out from Mexico City to Matamoros or
Brownsville, Tex., on a Mexican bus.

At this time, on my way up on a bus to Matamoros, it was September 2,
because I had that in my notes, I have some notes about the bus ride
and the date September 2.

And I went from Brownsville to New Orleans by way of either Greyhound
or Continental.

Mr. JENNER. When did you arrive in New Orleans?

Mr. THORNLEY. I went directly to New Orleans, so I imagine I arrived in
New Orleans on September 3, possibly September 4.

Mr. JENNER. So that between approximately May 1, 1963, and September 4
and 5----

Mr. THORNLEY. Say May 3 to September 4.

Mr. JENNER. You were not in New Orleans?

Mr. THORNLEY. Right.

Mr. JENNER. You were returning to your home in California? You stayed
there for approximately a month or so?

Mr. THORNLEY. Longer than that.

Mr. JENNER. Longer than that. You then went to Mexico, Mexico City, and
you then returned directly to New Orleans?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. During none of that period of time did you have any contact
with or hear anything about Oswald?

Mr. THORNLEY. Definitely not.

Mr. JENNER. You at one time at least were acquainted with a lady by the
name of Sylvia Bortin?

Mr. THORNLEY. Sylvia Bortin?

Mr. JENNER. B-o-r-t-i-n.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; this young lady, by the way----

Mr. JENNER. Where did she reside?

Mr. THORNLEY. In Whittier, Calif., or at least last summer she did,
I don't know where she resides now. This young lady, by the way,
was mentioned in--her mention in this whole matter came out of a
misunderstanding on my part of a question asked by the FBI agents.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Would you explain that, please?

Mr. THORNLEY. I don't recall what the question was--oh, yes, he had
asked me something about, I believe it was the First Unitarian Church
in Los Angeles. I had mentioned earlier at the time I was talking
to Oswald, and knew Oswald, I had been going to the First Unitarian
Church in Los Angeles. This is a group of quite far to the left people
politically for the most part, and mentioned in order to explain my
political relationship with Oswald, at that moment, and he began to ask
me questions about the First Unitarian Church and I answered, and then
he realized or understood or asked what Oswald's connection with the
First Unitarian Church was and I explained to him that there was none.
Miss Bortin never knew Oswald and vice versa, and these people were two
different parts of my life. There was this civilian compartment and the
military compartment, and I never intermingled them.

Mr. JENNER. This young lady married and her husband is now in Havana,
Cuba?

Mr. THORNLEY. That is what she told me last summer; yes. He was going
to school in Cuba.

Mr. JENNER. I take it this had nothing to do with yourself and Oswald's
views with respect to Castro that you told us about.

Mr. THORNLEY. No; this happened, I think, later, in fact I am sure it
happened later. At that time Miss Bortin, she was then unmarried, did
not know Robert Uname, I believe. I met him, I believe, September a
year later.

Mr. JENNER. Had you finished that?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. I take it that Oswald had no close personal friends at
least that you observed?

Mr. THORNLEY. That is correct. And the name of his closest friends I do
not know. I do remember he had a close acquaintance that he seemed to
get along with pretty well.

Mr. JENNER. In the unit?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; but I don't recall this man's name. If it was
mentioned to me, I probably could, but----

Mr. JENNER. You were groping for it when you were interviewed. You
suggested it might be Charles----

Mr. THORNLEY. I mentioned a Charles.

Mr. JENNER. Weis.

Mr. THORNLEY. Weir, but that was not the man. This was a friend of a
friend of the friend or a man who could give them that information
perhaps that I couldn't.

At this time perhaps, also, I was thinking of a possibility it might
have been Weir and since then I have remembered definitely who Weir was.

Mr. JENNER. Who was he?

Mr. THORNLEY. I don't remember whether his first name was Charles but I
remember who he was.

Mr. JENNER. He was a noncom?

Mr. THORNLEY. There was a man named Cooley. There was somebody else,
and these are my associations, but who it was who used to talk Russian
in the ranks with Oswald in the morning I don't know, but that is who
it was.

Mr. JENNER. Is this particular man you now mentioned the man who
occasionally talked Russian with Oswald in the ranks, is he the man who
you had in mind?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. As having been a friend of Oswald's?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; in that in the same respect that I was a friend of
Oswald's. Once, again, the exact terminology I would use would be close
acquaintance.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; I would say from your description of the relationship
with Oswald that it was more an acquaintanceship than a friendship.

Mr. THORNLEY. I think it was probably the same with this person from
what I recall, to my knowledge.

Mr. JENNER. In other words, when you say friend, he wasn't a buddy of
Oswald?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; Oswald was not the type of person who had, as it
has been emphasized on all parts, I think, and it confirms my own
impression, was not the type of person who made close friends or who
stuck with close friends.

Mr. JENNER. You saw no instance in which Oswald evidenced affection for
anybody, I mean in the nice sense of the word?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; none whatsoever.

Mr. JENNER. Or anybody evidenced any affection in the nice sense of the
word for him?

Mr. THORNLEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. I take it your trip to Mexico City was purely one of
general interest as you have described and had nothing to do with any
interest on your part in going to Cuba or attempting to go to Cuba?

Mr. THORNLEY. Believe me, no. I have no desire to go to Cuba unless I
am going to take a rifle and be on an invasion force or something.

Mr. JENNER. Did you hear of anybody in the Marine Corps, whose last
name was Hidell?

Mr. THORNLEY. At the time this name was mentioned to me that was--that
person, whoever it was that Oswald used to speak to in the ranks in the
morning came to my mind. But I can't say that that was the name, and
I am--of course, now, I am very leery that that--very uncertain as to
ever having heard the name Hidell, and I doubt it very much.

Mr. JENNER. Shortly after the unfortunate occurrence of November 22,
1963, you were interviewed by Secret Service agents, were you not?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes. Now, this is what I had mentioned earlier. This was
the Monday interview, of November 25, actually it was midnight Sunday
night as I recall. It seemed to me a couple of days later before I
spoke to the FBI. I believe there was a Mr. Rice--was one of the men.

Mr. JENNER. This was the evening of the 23d of November?

Mr. THORNLEY. Was it the 23d?

Mr. JENNER. It probably ran over.

Mr. THORNLEY. It must have been Saturday evening then. I had thought it
was Sunday evening.

Mr. JENNER. In any event you were then interviewed by some newspaper
reporters?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; that was quite some time afterward.

Mr. JENNER. Well, it was before November 27, 1963, was it not?

Mr. THORNLEY. It was after the 25th, I think. It was after I had
finished talking to the FBI, as I remember.

Mr. JENNER. I will mark as Thornley's Exhibit No. 1 what purports to be
a Xerox reprint of a newspaper article.

(The document referred to was marked Thornley Exhibit No. 1 for
identification.)

Mr. JENNER. Are you acquainted with that?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. What newspaper was this from?

Mr. THORNLEY. The States-Item of New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. And that article was a result of the newspaperman's
interview with you?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you see it upon its publication?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. You are familiar with it?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Does it substantially accurately reflect at least portions
of, in reasonable context, the interview you had with the newspaper
reporter?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; to a surprising degree for a newspaper, on the basis
of my past experience in dealings with them.

Mr. JENNER. Is there anything in that article that you regard as
reasonably seriously erroneous?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not when I read it the last time.

Mr. JENNER. Insofar as it attributes anything to you?

Mr. THORNLEY. May I reread it?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. THORNLEY. I would say this is accurate in everything it attributes
to me.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I offer Thornley Exhibit No. 1 in evidence.

Now, it appears from that article and from the testimony you have
given this morning that you were stimulated, or, as you have indicated
you prepared at least a first draft of a book or pamphlet or article
respecting your experiences in the Marine Corps, and one of the central
characters of which, mythical or otherwise, was a friend, Oswald.

Mr. THORNLEY. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. And when I spoke to you by telephone the other day I
inquired of you as to whether that was still in existence and you
responded that it was.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And you were kind enough to say you would bring it with you.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Have you done so?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. May I see it, please?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir; here is the draft completed in February of 1962.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; I am interested in seeing that in its condition as of
that time.

Mr. THORNLEY. Right. That is it. There is only one addition and there
is some blank paper on top. There is one addition, and that is the
short preface written yesterday to give some idea of how much was fact
and how much was fiction.

Mr. JENNER. All right--the page numbered 2?

Mr. THORNLEY. There was a table of contents once and it took two pages.

Mr. JENNER. Which I might identify in addition thereto as having the
word "Preface," at its top and your name and the date May 17, 1964,
Arlington, Va., at the bottom. That is what you prepared yesterday, is
that correct?

Mr. THORNLEY. Correct.

Mr. JENNER. All of the balance, therefore, commencing with the pages
numbered 3 and running through, I assume, consecutively?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. To page 250 is the article as it was when you completed it
in February 1962?

Mr. THORNLEY. Precisely.

Mr. JENNER. I would like the opportunity of reading through this and,
of course, 200-odd pages, we don't have the time to do it as of the
moment, and the Commission would like to have it among its records.
May I have the material and I will take it in the back room. We have
a Xerox, and have it duplicated? This, I appreciate, is your personal
property and it is of value. It is not something that the Commission
will place in the hands of others who may make commercial use of it.

Mr. THORNLEY. I am quite sure that it will be perfectly safe.

Mr. JENNER. All right. It is in the same condition now, that is, pages
3 through 250, as those pages were when you completed this manuscript
in February 1962?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; there might have been a couple of spelling errors
corrected since then or typographical errors but that is all.

Mr. JENNER. And that article of which we now speak and which for
purposes of identification I will mark as Thornley Exhibit No. 2, and I
offer Thornley Exhibit No. 2 in evidence.

(The document referred to was marked Thornley Exhibit No. 2 for
identification.)

Mr. JENNER. Subsequently thereto, I understand from my conversation
with you, you prepared a revision of that paper.

Mr. THORNLEY. I have been working on a revision.

Mr. JENNER. And you were kind enough to say you would bring that along
with you as well. Have you done so?

Mr. THORNLEY. I have been between this draft----

Mr. JENNER. When you said "this draft" you are referring to Thornley
Exhibit No. 2?

Mr. THORNLEY. Exhibit No. 2, and the draft I am now giving you--several
illegible drafts were made. This represents not the latest draft, but
the latest typewritten draft. It represents a fragment of it.

The first third, almost the first third, minus a couple of pages of a
novelette based upon this Exhibit No. 2.

Mr. JENNER. For purposes of identification the witness has now handed
me a set of letter-sized pages numbered 1 through 37, consecutively.

Are they consecutive?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And I take it, as against the length of the other paper,
that these pages 1 through 37, represent an incomplete novel.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That is it covers only a portion of the areas and times
covered by Thornley Exhibit No. 2.

Mr. THORNLEY. This ones takes a completely different approach in that
this did not take a chronological approach to the development of the
character based on Oswald, but takes a flashback approach.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. THORNLEY. Centering around an investigation of that character after
his defection to the Soviet Union.

Mr. JENNER. For further identification of the document which I will
mark Thornley Exhibit No. 3, page 1 is entitled "Chapter 1, Gung Ho."

Page 4 is entitled "Chapter 2, Fallen Comrade."

Page 7, in the center, is entitled "Chapter 3, Hush Hush."

Page 11 is entitled "Chapter 4, Blue Marines."

Page 14, in the upper portion, is entitled "Chapter 5, Peace Gospel."

Page 21 is entitled, at the head, "Chapter 7, The Killer."

Page 24, near the center, is entitled "Chapter 8, Captain Kidd."

Page 27, at the bottom, "Chapter 9, Mutiny."

Page 31, "Chapter 10, John Henry."

Page 34, "Chapter 11, The Storms."

And page 37, "Chapter 12, The Chicken."

(The document referred to was marked Thornley Exhibit No. 3 for
identification.)

Mr. THORNLEY. Now, this Exhibit No. 3 is a much greater fictionalized
approach toward, well, as far as reference goes to Oswald, the
character upon--the character which is based upon Oswald in Exhibit No.
2, Johnny Shellburn, Exhibit No. 3 is much farther from life.

Mr. JENNER. Is Johnny Shellburn assimilated to Oswald?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; much more so in Exhibit No. 2, though, than in this
one.

Mr. JENNER. That is Exhibit No. 3.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; since I wrote Exhibit No. 2, I have learned to write
fiction rather than a thinly disguised biography.

Mr. JENNER. In other words, Exhibit No. 2 was primarily a biography?

Mr. THORNLEY. Not in the strict sense that it portrayed a man's life in
detail, but in the sense that any reference, most of the references, as
is explained in this preface toward the end of the book----

Mr. JENNER. When you say this preface, you mean the preface to Exhibit
No. 2?

Mr. THORNLEY. That is, Johnny Shellburn toward the end of the book,
well, from before the middle of the book on, extends more and more to
reflect Oswald's character, and I definitely was thinking about Lee
Harvey Oswald when I wrote this book, Exhibit No. 2, whereas----

Mr. JENNER. In your discussion refer to them by exhibit number.

Mr. THORNLEY. I will keep my hands below the table.

Mr. JENNER. You don't have to do that. Just use the exhibit numbers.

Mr. THORNLEY. Whereas in Exhibit No. 3, I have universalized it
more, tried to get away from giving any impression that I am making
a chronology of the life and times of Lee Harvey Oswald, which is
something I thought would be relevant as far as the Commission would be
concerned in reading the material.

Mr. JENNER. Would you mark Exhibit No. 3 accordingly, Mr. Reporter?

I offer in evidence Thornley Exhibit No. 3. I take it, Mr. Thornley,
that you commenced the preparation of Exhibit No. 3 subsequently to the
assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. And that Exhibit No. 3 reflects a course of events and
their imprint upon you that occurred on and after November 22, 1963.

Mr. THORNLEY. No, no; Exhibit No. 3 reflects the same course of events
reflected in Exhibit No. 2. As far as the telling of the story goes and
the characters therein it takes place back in 1959. It makes a definite
attempt, however, to get away from Oswald as a specific character and
to discuss the problem of disillusionment in the peacetime military or
disillusionment with values on a much more universalized range than
Exhibit No. 2.

Mr. JENNER. All right. May I make a copy of Exhibit No. 3?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Under the same circumstances and upon the same conditions
as you granted your consent to make a copy of Exhibit No. 2?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes, sir; Exhibit No. 3 also does include some things
on--that I have acquired through the news on Oswald since the
assassination because Oswald tends to reflect the type of person I was
talking about. So to put it, to make it as clear as possible, right now
I realize I am saying Exhibit No. 3 is more like Oswald and less like
Oswald, to put it as clearly as possible.

Mr. JENNER. You are going in two directions at once.

Mr. THORNLEY. Exhibit No. 2 is more like the Oswald I knew in MACS 9,
the Oswald of my experience, whereas Exhibit No. 3 is a universalized
Oswaldian-type character based upon not only my own experience but
the news that has come to me about Oswald, about other people like
Oswald, other defectors, other assassins, and so on and so forth, since
November 22.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, Mr. Thornley, tell me something about Kerry
Thornley. You obviously, to me, are not a doorman.

Mr. THORNLEY. Oh, yes; I am a doorman.

Mr. JENNER. You are at the moment performing that service. But that
isn't your objective in life.

Mr. THORNLEY. My objective is to write books, novels primarily, as
many as I can in the years that are given to me, and possibly upon
publication of one of them to go back to school to further my ability
to write.

Mr. JENNER. Are you taking any training in that respect or have you in
recent years?

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, not formally. I have devoted myself to a lot of
exercises in writing, and I have availed myself of the help of any
experts I could grab onto, including successful novelists and former
newspaper reporters and so on and so forth, to help me solve problems
in my writing and improve it, but there is really, to my mind, my
outlook on writing a novel; for example, there is not much you can
learn from a formal course in writing. I think you can learn much more
from, say, the study of linguistics or semantics; if you are going to
learn anything from a university, for example, on writing, and this I
intend to do in due time.

Mr. JENNER. We occasionally have been off the record, not often, and
I have talked with you on the telephone. Is there anything that was
said between us in the course of our telephone conversations or in
any off-the-record discussions that you think is pertinent to the
Commission's assignment of investigating the assassination of President
Kennedy that I have failed to bring onto the record?

Mr. THORNLEY. No, sir; I think we have very thoroughly covered it.

Mr. JENNER. Is there anything that occurs to you that you would like to
add that you think might be pertinent to our inquiry and of help to the
Commission?

Mr. THORNLEY. No; there is certainly nothing else I can think of.

Mr. JENNER. Your deposition will be written up rather promptly. We
probably will have it tomorrow, and would you be good enough to call
me, say--when do you go on duty?

Mr. THORNLEY. At 5 o'clock.

Mr. JENNER. Call me in the forenoon--I mean right after lunch--and if
it is convenient will you come in and read over your deposition and
sign it?

Mr. THORNLEY. All right. May I just, to make absolutely sure, may I
take down your phone number once more?



AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE B. CHURCH, JR.

The following affidavit was executed by George B. Church, Jr. on June
27, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF FLORIDA,
 _County of Hillsborough, ss_:

I, George B. Church, Jr., 2427 Sunset Drive, Tampa 9, Florida, being
duly sworn say:

1. I am a retired Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army and
am now a Junior High School teacher in Tampa. I am attending the
University of Florida this summer.

2. My wife and I travelled to Europe on the S.S. Marion Lykes which
departed New Orleans, Louisiana for LeHavre, France, on or about
September 20, 1959. This vessel was a freighter with accommodations for
12 passengers assigned two to a room. On this particular trip, there
were but four passengers aboard. One of them was Lee Harvey Oswald, who
shared a state room with an individual named Billy Joe Lord. The trip
from New Orleans, Louisiana, terminated at LeHavre, France. The entire
trip was approximately 16 days.

3. Before this trip, I had never before seen nor heard of Lee Harvey
Oswald.

4. All of the passengers ate at one table; however, Lee Harvey Oswald
missed quite a few meals because he was seasick much of the time.
Furthermore, there was no fixed schedule for meals. When we did have
meals with Oswald, he sat cater-cornered from me. However, Oswald was
rather withdrawn, and thus I did not converse with him a great deal.
Oswald did state during our discussion of our destinations, that he was
going to attend a university in Switzerland. Oswald did not give the
name of the university and did not indicate that he had a clear cut
schedule as to his course of study.

5. I recall having discussed with Oswald the Depression of the 1930's.
Oswald appeared quite bitter as to the hard time his mother had
suffered during this period. I tried to point out to Oswald that I
had lived through and survived the Depression and that millions of
people in the United States also had suffered during those years. This,
however, made no impression on Oswald.

6. Oswald spent much of the time by himself. He did not participate in
any of the social activities, nor in any conversation. He did mention
his service in the Marine Corps, and he stated that he did not like
the military service. Generally Oswald was not friendly, and he did
not make much of an impression on me since I was not particularly
interested in him.

7. The ship had a receiver in the ward room which was off and on during
the voyage. I did listen to it occasionally, and I did understand
German. I do not know if Oswald listened to the receiver or not, and I
have no idea as to his knowledge of any foreign language.

8. Oswald did not indicate that he was going to go to Russia.

9. After the trip I never saw nor heard from Lee Harvey Oswald again.

Signed this 27th day of June 1964.

    (S) George B. Church, Jr.,
        GEORGE B. CHURCH, Jr.



AFFIDAVIT OF MRS. GEORGE B. CHURCH, JR.

The following affidavit was executed by Mrs. George B. Church, Jr., on
June 27, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF FLORIDA,
 _County of Hillsborough, ss_:

I, Mrs. George B. Church, Jr., being duly sworn say:

1. I live at 2427 Sunset Drive, Tampa 9, Florida. I travelled to Europe
on the S.S. Marion Lykes which departed New Orleans, Louisiana for
LeHavre, France, on or about September 20, 1959.

2. I recall that besides my husband, there were two other passengers:
Lee Harvey Oswald and Bill Lord. My husband and I sat at the same table
with Oswald for meals, but outside of meals, we did not have much
contact with him. While I had endeavored to get acquainted with Lee
Harvey Oswald, he did not enter into friendly conversation. He stayed
to himself, and I considered him peculiar.

3. Oswald indicated that the purpose of the trip was to attend a
university in Switzerland, but he evaded giving the name of the
university and, he did not indicate any clear cut or positive courses
of study other than a statement to the effect that he might study
philosophy or psychology. His attitude seemed to be one of resentment.
His roommate, Bill Lord, was going to attend a university in France and
was studying French during the trip. Lord was quite exuberant about his
course of study and purpose of life, in contrast to the attitude of Lee
Harvey Oswald.

4. I do not recall Oswald doing any reading. However, I gave him a book
which he never returned.

5. Upon completion of the voyage aboard the S.S. Marion Lykes, I
obtained the address of Bill Lord for the purpose of perhaps later
writing him or sending him Christmas cards. I also requested Oswald's
address and he questioned the purpose of my request. He later
reluctantly furnished his home address as, C/O Mrs. M. Oswald, 3124
West Fifth Street, Fort Worth, Texas. I wrote this in my address book.

6. At no time did Lee Harvey Oswald indicate that he was actually
planning or attempting to defect or go to Russia. There was no
indication that Oswald had any Communist leanings.

I did notice that Oswald spoke with the Chief Engineer who was then
aboard the S.S. Marion Lykes. The Chief Engineer indicated to me that
he felt that Oswald was a smart boy.

7. This was the last I ever saw or heard from Lee Harvey Oswald.

Signed this 27th day of June 1964.

    (S) Mrs. George B. Church, Jr.,
        Mrs. GEORGE B. CHURCH, Jr.



AFFIDAVIT OF BILLY JOE LORD

The following affidavit was executed by Billy Joe Lord on June 26, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Travis, ss_:

I, Billy Joe Lord, being duly sworn say:

1. I am an Airman Third Class in the United States Air Force, and I am
in the 340th Bomb Wing, Combat Defense Squadron at Bergstrom Air Force
Base, Texas. I am 22 years old and my parents live at Midland, Texas.

2. After graduating from Midland High School in 1959, with the
financial assistance of my parents, I made plans to continue my
education in France. During August, 1959, I made an application for a
passport, and on or about September 15, 1959, I departed Midland, Texas
via train for New Orleans, Louisiana, arriving there about September
17, 1959. I spent the next three days touring the city of New Orleans
and making several trips to the ticket office of the Lykes Lines. The
cost of passage aboard the ship S.S. Marion Lykes amounted to slightly
more than $200. I registered and stayed in the LaSalle Hotel on Canal
Street, which was near the city library. I visited the library several
times during this stay in the city. During this period I did not know
Lee Harvey Oswald.

3. On September 20, 1959, I boarded the freighter S.S. Marion Lykes at
New Orleans. Upon boarding the ship, I was shown to my room, and when I
got there, Lee Harvey Oswald was already there and moving in. We were
to share this room. I had never before seen nor heard of Lee Harvey
Oswald. Lee Harvey Oswald and I shared this cabin for the duration of
the trip to France which was fourteen days.

4. In our first conversation, Oswald said that he was recently
discharged from the Marines and that he had worked in some technical
field while in the Marines. He indicated that he was somewhat bitter
about the fact that his mother had to work in a drugstore in Fort
Worth, Texas, and was having a difficult time. He also said that
he would probably return to the United States to work. He gave no
indication of his ultimate destination, although he said he was going
to travel around in Europe and possibly attend school in Switzerland if
he had sufficient funds. Also in this first conversation, we discussed
religion. I do not know why we discussed religion except that possibly
he noticed that I had a bible. Oswald maintained that he could not
see how I could believe in God in view of the fact that science had
disproved the existence of God, and that there was only matter.

5. After the first day, I hardly conversed with Oswald at all. Oswald
was not outgoing and neither was I. We just were not very friendly.

6. Besides Oswald and myself, there were two other passengers aboard
the ship. They were a retired U.S. Army Colonel and his wife, Colonel
and Mrs. George B. Church, Jr. All four of the passengers generally
ate their meals together in the ships officer's mess. Oswald ate most
of his meals with us. I do not recall Colonel Church and his wife
associating very much with Lee Harvey Oswald.

7. I shared a closet with Oswald, but I did not notice anything out
of the ordinary among Oswald's possessions. He did show me either his
military identification card or his passport.

8. Oswald did not indicate that he might defect to Russia. To the
best of my knowledge, Oswald did not receive any correspondence or
communications while aboard the ship, nor did he associate with any
of the ship's crew. Oswald never mentioned any contacts or friends in
Europe.

9. Lee Harvey Oswald appeared to be a normal, healthy individual,
mentally alert, but extremely cynical in his general attitude.

On October 5, 1959, our ship arrived in France, and I disembarked from
the ship. I never saw or heard from him again. It is my recollection
that he departed from the ship subsequent to my departure. I had
written my mother about all the passengers. When Oswald defected, she
sent me a newspaper clipping about it.

10. Oswald spent a great deal of his time during the trip on the deck.
I do not recall him doing any reading. I do recall, however, that there
was a radio speaker which received programs from Europe and that Oswald
and Colonel Church seemed to understand a little bit of the foreign
language that came over on the speaker. I thought it was German, but I
am not sure.

11. I attended the Institute of French Studies at the City of Tours,
Province of Touraine, France, from October, 1959 to February, 1962
intermittently while auditing courses at the University of Poitires,
Tours, France, and at the Sorbonne, University of Paris, France. I
returned to the United States aboard the French ship, Liberty, in June,
1960. I went to France again in February of 1961 for further education,
and returned to the United States in February of 1962.

Signed this 26th day of June 1964.

    (S) Billy Joe Lord,
        BILLY JOE LORD.



AFFIDAVIT OF ALEXANDER KLEINLERER

The following affidavit was executed by Alexander Kleinlerer on June
16, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Tarrant, ss_:

Alexander Kleinlerer of 3542 Kent Street, Fort Worth, Texas, being duly
sworn, says:

1. My name is Alexander Kleinlerer and I do now reside and for several
years last pass have resided at the above address.

2. I am and have for several years been a foreign representative of
Loma Industries, a plastics production company, located at 3000 West
Pafford Street, Fort Worth, Texas. I am 41 years of age and single.
I was born in Poland of Polish parents both of whom died in German
concentration camps during World War II. During the War I lost all
members of my family, not only my immediate family, but my relatives
as well, other than a sister in Paris, France who is still alive and
a cousin who once resided in Russia but who now lives in Poland. The
area in Poland in which I and my family and relatives resided was
overrun by the German Army. I was confined in Buchenwald concentration
camp until 1945 when I was liberated by General Patton's forces. I
immediately moved to Czechoslovakia and then to France. In May of 1956,
I journeyed from France to the United States and found employment with
Loma Industries. I returned to France as a foreign representative for
that company in November of 1957 and remained there until June of 1961
when I returned to the United States. In due course thereafter I became
a naturalized citizen of the United States in May 1963.

3. I speak a number of European languages well. As a result I have
become acquainted with numerous foreign language speaking individuals
in the Fort Worth-Dallas area. These include, insofar as the Oswald
incident is concerned, Anna Meller, George Bouhe, Mr. and Mrs. George
deMohrenschildt, Mr. and Mrs. Max Clark, Mrs. Elena Hall, Lydia
Dymitruk, Mr. and Mrs. Declan P. Ford and Mr. and Mrs. Igor Vladimir
Voshinin.

4. During 1962, I was enamoured of and was courting Mrs. Elena Hall who
was then divorced from her husband John. I first become acquainted with
Lee Harvey and Marina Oswald on a Sunday morning in the fore part of
September 1962. I was working in Mrs. Hall's garage at 4760 Trail Lake
Drive, Fort Worth, Texas, building wooden baffles for stereo speakers.
George Bouhe, a valued friend of mine, drove up in his automobile
accompanied by Oswald, Marina and their infant child. I was introduced
to Oswald and to Marina. Oswald somewhat stiffly acknowledged the
introduction but was laconic and uncommunicative thereafter. They had
come to inquire of Mrs. Hall about dental problems of Marina's. I have
a fairly distinct recollection that Mrs. Anna Meller also accompanied
the group on this occasion. Mrs. Hall is a dental technician employed
by the Patterson Dental Laboratory in Fort Worth. The group was seeking
Mrs. Hall's help as to where a low cost dentist or clinic could be
found where they might take Marina for dental care, having in mind that
the Oswalds were in straitened financial circumstances. I do not recall
what the result of this conversation was in that connection as I did
not accompany the group when they went into Mrs. Hall's home.

5. Thereafter during September, while the Oswalds still resided on
Mercedes Street near the Montgomery Ward store, I visited there with
Mrs. Hall on two occasions. The reason for the earliest of these
additional occasions was that Mrs. Hall and George Bouhe had asked me
to inquire among the girls in my office for dresses and other wearing
apparel for Marina. I collected some sweaters, skirts and a dress or
two. Mrs. Hall also inquired among her friends and collected some
things. We put these together in one package and Mrs. Hall and I drove
to the Oswald apartment on Mercedes Street to deliver the package. We
were shocked to find that the Oswald child had no baby crib or bed but
was kept on the floor in the bedroom either in a suitcase or between
two suitcases.

6. Within a few days we returned to the Oswalds with a baby bed that
Mrs. Hall had obtained from some friend. We purchased a mattress for
the baby bed and delivered these items to the Oswalds at the Mercedes
Street apartment.

7. There was another occasion when I was at the Mercedes Street
apartment. George Bouhe had called me and asked me to meet him there.
This had nothing to do with the Oswalds. George Bouhe and I are good
friends and he was calling to say that he was going to be in Fort Worth
at the Oswalds and asked me to drop by so we could have a friendly
visit. On this occasion I saw the Oswalds briefly. I recall that Anna
Meller came with George Bouhe and there was an older lady whose name
I do not now recall. I remember that Oswald and Marina were seated
at the dining table eating. We were sitting there talking with Mr.
George Bouhe when suddenly Oswald noticed there was no butter on the
table. He rose red faced and angry and in our presence rudely and in a
domineering and overbearing manner, and as though Marina was a mere
chattel, proceeded to vigourously reprimand her. It was like a sergeant
bullying a new recruit. We were all embarrassed and shocked.

8. Mrs. Hall was injured in an automobile accident in Fort Worth the
evening of October 18, 1962. Marina and the child were residing in Mrs.
Hall's home at this time. They had come to Mrs. Hall's home earlier in
the month because Oswald had, we understood, lost his job and it had
been agreed among Mrs. Hall, George Bouhe and the others that Oswald
would go to Dallas to seek employment and Marina would stay with Mrs.
Hall. Mrs. Hall was released from the hospital in the latter part of
October, I think around October 26th. She spent a few days at home and
on October 30, 1962, a date which I have checked from a receipt that
I have, she left Fort Worth for Garden City, New York, to visit with
friends. While away on this trip she was reunited with and remarried
her former husband John Hall. My recollection is that they returned to
Fort Worth about the 11th or 12th of November 1962, and in any event
by the 15th. While Mrs. Hall was in the hospital and while she was
visiting in New York, I frequently called at the Hall home during my
lunch period (usually about 1:00 p.m.), at the request of Mrs. Hall, to
inquire of Marina's needs and her welfare and to see that matters about
the house were all right. I reported regularly to Mrs. Hall what my
impressions were.

9. During the periods Mrs. Hall was in the hospital and later in New
York, Oswald came to the Hall home on several occasions on Friday night
and stayed until late Sunday afternoon or early Sunday evening when he
returned by bus to Dallas. Mrs. Hall's home is approximately 12 to 14
miles from the business district of Fort Worth, and it is approximately
30 to 32 miles from the Fort Worth business district to the business
district of Dallas. A trip from Mrs. Hall's home to Dallas involves in
travel some 40 or more miles.

10. I distinctly recall the occasion upon which and the circumstances
under which Marina left Mrs. Hall's and was taken by Oswald and George
deMohrenschildt's daughter Alexandra and her husband Gary Taylor to
Dallas to live. It was on a Sunday while Mrs. Hall was in New York.
My recollection is that it was in the fore part of November on the
Sunday preceding the return of Mr. and Mrs. Hall from New York. On the
preceding Friday evening the phone rang in my apartment. It was Marina.
She said that she was going to leave the Halls and go to Dallas to
live with Oswald. At this point Oswald interrupted and spoke on the
telephone saying to me in a commanding way that they were going to
move into Dallas that coming week-end and he directed me to come by
the next day. I came by the Halls the next day, which was Saturday, in
the morning. Marina and Oswald were there. I entered the house. Marina
was in the living room with her child in her arms. We had just begun
to discuss the matter of moving the next day when Oswald observed that
the zipper on Marina's skirt was not completely closed. He called to
her in a very angry and commanding tone of voice just like an officer
commanding a soldier. His exact words were, "Come Here!", in the
Russian Language, and he uttered them the way you would call a dog with
which you were displeased in order to inflict punishment on him. He was
standing in the doorway leading from the living room into another room
of the house. When she reached the doorway he rudely reprimanded her in
a flat imperious voice about being careless in her dress and slapped
her hard in the face twice. Marina still had the baby in her arms. Her
face was red and tears came to her eyes. All this took place in my
presence. I was very much embarrassed and also angry but I had long
been afraid of Oswald and I did not say anything.

11. The arrangements for moving the following day were discussed. I was
to be there to supervise the removal of the Oswald paraphernalia and to
lock up the Hall residence.

12. When I arrived at the Hall's residence on that Sunday morning,
Marina and George deMohrenschildt's daughter, Alexandra Taylor, were
there. Oswald and Gary Taylor, the husband of Alexandra, George
deMohrenschildt's daughter, were off somewhere in Fort Worth seeking
to rent a "U-Haul-It" automobile trailer into which the Oswald
paraphernalia was to be placed. Most of the Oswald goods that had
been stored in Mrs. Hall's garage and which had been in her home were
already packed in preparation for placing in the "U-Haul-It" trailer.
Oswald and Gary Taylor returned in due course, in Taylor's automobile
with the trailer hooked on behind. Taylor among other occupations, was
a taxi driver in Dallas at this time.

13. I had met both Alexandra and Gary Taylor at the Hall's on a prior
occasion. This was a weekday evening after Mrs. Hall returned from
the hospital. They had been eating dinner at Mrs. Hall's home. I came
to visit Mrs. Hall and was surprised to see them all at the table. Of
course I left immediately since I hadn't been invited to the dinner.
The Taylors brought Oswald with them in Taylor's car so that Oswald
could visit Marina.

14. I supervised the placing of the Oswald goods and wearing apparel
in the "U-Haul-It" trailer. There were several instances in which I
had to intervene when Oswald picked up some of Mrs. Hall's things to
place in the trailer. I could not say whether this was deliberate or
inadvertent, except that there were several instances. My recollection
is that Oswald and Taylor had obtained the trailer at a service station
in Fort Worth. It seems to me it was a place somewhere on Barry Street.
In due course the loading was completed. They got into Taylor's
automobile and drove off. I understood from the telephone conversation
on Friday night and my visit with the Oswalds at the Halls on Saturday,
and the conversations that took place on Sunday, that the Oswalds were
moving into an apartment in Dallas which Oswald had very recently
rented. This was the last time I ever saw either of the Oswalds or had
any contact with them. I had arrived at Mrs. Hall's around 1:00 p.m.
and they departed around 3:30 p.m.

15. I recall that while Marina was staying at the Halls, and either
before Mrs. Hall went to the hospital, or during the four or five days
she was at home before departing for New York, that Oswald telephoned
to speak with Marina. This was on a Saturday evening.

16. I recall the time that Oswald reported he had lost his job at
Leslie Welding Company. It was the first week-end in October 1962.
My recollection is that it was agreed that Marina would come to Mrs.
Hall's house to stay while Oswald looked for a job in Dallas. I am
uncertain whether Marina was brought directly to the Halls from the
Mercedes Street apartment. There may have been something about Marina
being taken to the Taylors' apartment in Dallas for a few days so that
she could have some dental care at the Baylor University Clinic in
Dallas. I do recall clearly that Mrs. Hall had a pickup truck which
was owned by the dental laboratory where she was employed. Mrs. Hall
had permission to drive to and from work with the pickup truck. It
was agreed that the Oswald household goods and other paraphernalia
would be moved to the Halls in the pickup truck. It may well be that
Marina went directly to the Taylors; that the Oswald household goods
and paraphernalia was taken to the Halls; and that Marina came to the
Halls when her dental care at Baylor Clinic was completed. I understand
Marina's appointments were on October 8th, 10th and 15th. It is my
recollection, however, that the Oswald goods were packed in the trailer
by John Hall and Mrs. Hall and were taken to the Halls. It may be that
Oswald helped. My impression is that this was done on a Monday, but
since, as I have now been advised, Oswald apparently worked at Leslie
Welding Company on Monday, October 8th, that the transfer of the Oswald
goods did not take place until Monday night after Oswald returned from
his last working day at Leslie Welding Company. It was at Mrs. Hall's
invitation that Marina went to live at Mrs. Hall's house.

17. In any event, I recall that nothing was heard from Oswald for a
number of days after Marina came to Mrs. Halls to live. I assumed he
was in Dallas, and knowing that the distance between Dallas and Mrs.
Hall's home in Fort Worth was great, I thought relatively nothing of
this, except that I thought that he should have telephoned.

18. On a good many of the occasions that I dropped by the Hall
residence during my luncheon hour, I found that Marina had not yet
awakened. I would have to arouse her by ringing the door bell and
banging on the front door. I would find the household unkept, unwashed
dishes in the sink or on the eating table, and her's and the baby's
clothing strewn about the room. Marina would come to the door in a
wrap-around, her hair disheveled and her eyes heavy with the effect of
many hours of sleep. She would make some excuses about sleeping late.

On other occasions I was frequently in the Hall home when Mrs. Hall was
home in the evenings and on weekends. I noticed that Marina did nothing
to help Mrs. Hall in the house. Mrs. Hall often complained to me that
Marina was lazy, that she slept until noon or thereabouts, and would
not do anything around the house to help. I observed on many occasions
that Marina was not neat and that she often dressed rather haphazardly.

19. I was concerned and suspicious about Oswald from the outset. I
could not understand how he had been able to go to Russia and return
with seeming ease, especially since he had attempted to defect and
because I was aware that my cousin had not been able to get his wife
and child out of Russia although he now lives in Poland. Also, I was
alarmed from the outset by Oswald's talk. Other friends told me he
frequently compared conditions here in America with those in Russia to
the detriment of America and he did this in a way that was contemptuous
of America. They said he would repeatedly say that there was no
unemployment in Russia but that there was a lot of it in America; that
capitalists in America lived off the workers. They said he argued that
in Russia medical attention and care was at hand and was free, whereas
in America you either had to pay doctors or hospitals or that even in
clinics you always had to pay something.

20. I saw magazines about Russia in the Oswald apartment on Mercedes
Street. Some were in the Russian language and some were in English.
There were also newspapers in the Russian language.

21. I have always been very grateful to America. Americans have been
very kind to me and I think a good deal of this country. It upset me
when Oswald would say things against the United States. I did not argue
with him because he appeared to me to be dangerous in his mind and I
was frightened. I once said to him that, unlike him, I had come to this
country for freedom and not to look for trouble by criticizing the
United States; that while I did not have much money, I did have freedom
and opportunity and Americans were kind to me.

22. I and Mrs. Hall, Mrs. Meller, George Bouhe, and the others were
disturbed that Oswald flatly declined to make any effort to teach
Marina English. He said he wanted to keep his Russian sharpened up. We
thought this was very selfish of him. He would speak to other members
of our group in Russian. I refused to discuss anything with him in
Russian. I told him that if he wanted to talk with me he would have
to talk to me in English; that he was born and raised in this country
and his national tongue was English and he should be proud to speak
English. I never answered him at any time in Russian. I thought at
times he was bent on making Marina dissatisfied with the United States
and also that he did not want her to have friends.

23. He treated Marina very poorly. He belittled her and was boorish to
her in our presence. He talked to her and ordered her around just as
though she were a mere chattel. He was never polite or tender to her. I
feel very strongly that she was frightened of him. The only occasion I
saw him physically mistreat her was the occasion I have mentioned but I
heard repeatedly from Mrs. Hall, George Bouhe, and others that Oswald
was physically mistreating her.

24. Oswald was not grateful for any of the help that was being accorded
to him and Marina. He never once offered to contribute in even a
small way to Mrs. Hall or any of the others with whom Marina stayed.
This was often a topic of conversation among us. We did not have much
money ourselves and we were knocking ourselves out to help. He did not
express any thanks or evidence the slightest appreciation; in fact, he
evidenced displeasure and contempt.

25. I expressed to Mrs. Hall and to my friend George Bouhe, and to
others that I thought that they were only worsening things because the
Oswalds did not appear appreciative of what was being done for them. He
acted as though the world owed him a living. I had the impression from
time to time that Marina was pretending and acting.

26. Oswald always acted toward her like a soldier commanding one of his
troops. My overall impression of Oswald was that he was angry with the
whole world and with himself to boot; that he really did not know what
he wanted; that he was frustrated because he was not looked up to; and
that he was dissatisfied with everything, including himself.

27. Mrs. Hall told me on several occasions that Marina had said to her
that she was quite afraid of Oswald and that when she got to know a
little more English she intended to leave him. Oswald did not care who
was present as far as his boorish attitude toward Marina was concerned.
It seemed that he did not care what others thought about anything.

28. Anna Meller, Mrs. Hall, George Bouhe and the deMohrenschildts, and
all that group had pity for Marina and her child. None of us cared
for Oswald because of his political philosophy, his criticism of the
United States, his apparent lack of interest in anyone but himself and
because of his treatment of Marina. Although the men were sometimes
skeptical about helping them out, the ladies were quite compassionate
about Marina and felt that she needed help not only because of
their straitened financial circumstances, but because of Oswald's
mistreatment of her.

29. I recall that when I saw the newspaper item in the Fort Worth paper
about Oswald returning from Russia with his Russian wife, I spoke to
Max Clark and his wife. They are good friends and fine people, and he
is a lawyer. We were all apprehensive about coming in contact with the
Oswalds but all the friends of mine later expressed the view that the
Federal Bureau of Investigation knew Oswald and Marina were coming into
this country, and if they did not do anything about it, it was probably
all right to have contact with them. I am afraid I never became
completely reassured.

30. Marina never had any money, not even pennies. Oswald would not give
any money to her. Consequently, when she lived with Mrs. Hall and later
with the others she and her baby were utterly dependent upon their
host. She could not buy even a package of cigarettes, and even had she
wished, she could not tender any token to her hosts.

Signed this 16th day of June 1964.

    (S) Alexander Kleinlerer,
        ALEXANDER KLEINLERER.



TESTIMONY OF MRS. DONALD GIBSON

The testimony of Mrs. Donald Gibson was taken at 11 a.m., on May 28,
1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Mr. Albert E.
Jenner, Jr., assistant counsel, and Richard M. Mosk, member of the
staff of the President's Commission.


Mr. JENNER. Would you be sworn?

Mrs. Gibson, in the testimony you are about to give on your deposition
do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth?

Mrs. GIBSON. I do.

Mr. JENNER. Be seated, please. You are Mrs. Donald Gibson?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. You are the former Alexandra De Mohrenschildt?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And you were at one time married to Mr. Gary Taylor, of
Dallas, Tex.?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. You now live in Wingdale, N.Y.?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What is your address in Wingdale?

Mrs. GIBSON. Harlem Valley State Hospital, Building 28, Wingdale, N.Y.

Mr. JENNER. I take it you are employed at the hospital?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That is a State mental institution?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Is your husband also employed there?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Our information is that you were born on Christmas Day 1943?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; that is right.

Mr. JENNER. That was here in the United States?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. New York, to be exact?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. So that you are now 20 years of age and will be 21 next
December?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Your father is George Sergei De Mohrenschildt?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Your stepmother is Jeanne Fomenko De Mohrenschildt?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. F-o-m-e-n-k-o?

Mrs. GIBSON. I didn't know that.

Mr. JENNER. Also at one point in her life, Jeanne Bogoiavlensky; is
that correct?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; Bogoiavlensky.

Mr. JENNER. You were a resident of Dallas, Tex., in 1962?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. You were then married to Gary Taylor?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What was your address?

Mrs. GIBSON. 3519 Fairmount.

Mr. JENNER. You married Mr. Taylor at a very early age as I recall?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. When was that?

Mrs. GIBSON. November 21, 1959.

Mr. JENNER. I don't care for the details, but after you married Mr.
Taylor, you and he lived in various places in Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. What was the nature of his employment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, he did all sorts of things. He went to school at one
time, to college.

Mr. JENNER. In Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; in Arlington. We lived in Arlington, too.

Mr. JENNER. What college was that?

Mrs. GIBSON. Arlington State. I can't recall all the jobs he did. I
mean he did a little bit of this and a little bit of that.

Mr. JENNER. Let's get to 1962. What was he doing then?

Mrs. GIBSON. He was working off and on with a photographer, working
on a movie, and driving a taxi part time. He also, he and this friend
of his, Steve Moore, were trying to found this little company of
landscaping. That didn't work out, so he still kept on his photography
business.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall his first name?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, it is----

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall his birthday?

Mrs. GIBSON. December 24, I think 1939.

Mr. JENNER. So he was older, 4 years older than you?

Mrs. GIBSON. He was 4 years older than me; that is right.

Mr. JENNER. I take it you were subsequently divorced?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. You and Mr. Taylor. And when was that?

Mrs. GIBSON. Our divorce became final, I believe, the 15th of April of
last year.

Mr. JENNER. Of 1963?

Mrs. GIBSON. 1963.

Mr. JENNER. I take it there is a waiting period then?

Mrs. GIBSON. Three months.

Mr. JENNER. So the decree was entered the 15th of January?

Mrs. GIBSON. I really don't know. I didn't enter it. I left Dallas and
asked him to please divorce me.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mrs. GIBSON. I didn't want to go through all the rigmarole of getting a
divorce; no. I wanted to get out of Dallas right then.

Mr. JENNER. Were you living together as man and wife during all of the
year 1962?

Mrs. GIBSON. Until November, the last part of November of 1962; yes.

Mr. JENNER. Had you been separated prior to that time?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; in 1961, I believe.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have a child?

Mrs. GIBSON. One child.

Mr. JENNER. Born of that marriage?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And that child's name?

Mrs. GIBSON. Curtis Lee Taylor.

Mr. JENNER. When was that child born?

Mrs. GIBSON. February 10, 1962.

Mr. JENNER. While living at 3519 Fairmount in Dallas during the year
1962, did you become acquainted with a lady by the name of Marina
Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Did you also become acquainted with a gentleman by the name
of Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. With whom did you become acquainted first?

Mrs. GIBSON. Marina Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. Tell me when, as closely as you can fix it. Let me put
it this way. Tell me first the circumstances under which you became
acquainted, what led up to it and how it occurred, and then fix as
closely as you can when in 1962 you did become acquainted.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, my stepmother and my father called me up.

Mr. JENNER. Your stepmother is Jeanne De Mohrenschildt?

Mrs. GIBSON. Jeanne; and my father called me up one evening and asked
me----

Mr. JENNER. At your apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. At my apartment; and asked me if I would please take care
of Marina Oswald's child while she went to the dentist, and could she
stay overnight with me because she had two appointments in a row, one
on one day and one the next day, and I said all right. And as for the
date, I imagine you know it better than I do.

Mr. JENNER. I don't know anything better than you do.

Mrs. GIBSON. If you give me the date on the pads. I don't remember the
dates at all.

Mr. JENNER. Was it the month of September?

Mrs. GIBSON. No. As I said, I thought it was before September.

Mr. JENNER. Before September?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Do you remember anything about the weather?

Mrs. GIBSON. It was very hot, but I don't remember the month. It could
have been----

Mr. JENNER. Could it have been in August?

Mrs. GIBSON. It could have been the latter part of August. It seems to
me that would be about right.

Mr. JENNER. Can you recall anything about what your father and/or your
stepmother said to you in identifying these people? You were naturally
curious as to who they were?

Mrs. GIBSON. They told me that they were recently, Marina and Lee were
recently here from Russia, and hadn't been in Dallas very long, or Fort
Worth, wherever they were staying, and that she had a child the same
age as mine, and that my stepmother thought it would be very nice if
we got acquainted. And she said Marina was around my age, and asked if
I would please help them out since they didn't have any room in their
apartment to keep her while she had these dental appointments.

Mr. JENNER. That is, they didn't have any room in the De
Mohrenschildts' apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. From that conversation you became aware, had the impression
that your father and your stepmother had had some prior acquaintance
with these people?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think they just recently met them.

Mr. JENNER. That was the impression?

Mrs. GIBSON. That was the impression I got.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall what day of the week--that is, not the
particular date as such, but was it a weekday, a Saturday, or a Sunday?

Mrs. GIBSON. It was a weekday. Whether it was in the beginning of the
week or the middle or the end I don't remember, but it was a weekday.

Mr. JENNER. What time of day was it?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, they called me the night before, but it was in the
early morning of the next day.

Mr. JENNER. That you met Marina?

Mrs. GIBSON. That I met Marina.

Mr. JENNER. Did Marina come alone?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; my stepmother brought her and the child.

Mr. JENNER. That was in the morning?

Mrs. GIBSON. In the morning; that is right.

Mr. JENNER. Describe your apartment, will you please?

Mrs. GIBSON. How do you mean describe it?

Mr. JENNER. How many rooms, living room, bedroom, two bedrooms,
kitchen, dining room?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, there are five rooms, I guess, in all.

Mr. JENNER. And they consisted of?

Mrs. GIBSON. Living room, dining room, kitchen, bedroom, and bathroom.
There was a small adjoining room to the bedroom but it wouldn't be
classified as a whole room.

Mr. JENNER. Sort of more of a dressing room?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. For what purpose were you employing that room at that time?

Mrs. GIBSON. My child slept in that room.

Mr. JENNER. Where did you folks, that is yourself and your husband,
normally sleep?

Mrs. GIBSON. We slept in the living room.

Mr. JENNER. That was your normal practice?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. So that the bedroom you mentioned was not occupied?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; it wasn't.

Mr. JENNER. It was not in use, rather, at the time that Marina stayed
with you?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; it was used as a playroom really for my son Curtis.

Mr. JENNER. Your stepmother brought Marina and the baby to your home?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. Was your husband home at that time?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't think so.

Mr. JENNER. That is it was at a time when he would have departed for
work?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I believe he had already gone to work.

Mr. JENNER. You said that Marina was to receive some dental care?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. Did she remain in the apartment all day after she arrived?

Mrs. GIBSON. After she came back from the dentist, she stayed there,
I think she had a tooth, one or two pulled, and she stayed there that
afternoon, after she came back from the dentist.

Mr. JENNER. Your stepmother brought her and then your stepmother took
her to the dentist?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. They returned?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. That afternoon.

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. Did Marina remain and the baby remain with you overnight
and into the next day?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Where did Marina and her child stay that evening?

Mrs. GIBSON. They slept in the bedroom.

Mr. JENNER. You didn't lodge her child, June, in the room in which your
son Curtis was?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. When did you first meet Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. I believe it was on the evening of the first day that
Marina stayed with me.

Mr. JENNER. Did someone bring him or did he come alone?

Mrs. GIBSON. As far as I know, he came alone.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression as to the place from which he had
come?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know where he had come from.

Mr. JENNER. But he came alone?

Mrs. GIBSON. As far as I know; yes.

Mr. JENNER. Was Marina able to speak English?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; not a word.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have any problems in that connection?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, I got a little dictionary and tried to figure out a
few words, but it was very hard to communicate with her.

Mr. JENNER. I take it then from your remark that you yourself are not
fluent in Russian?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Do you understand Russian?

Mrs. GIBSON. A few words.

Mr. JENNER. Your father speaks Russian fluently, does he not?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he does.

Mr. JENNER. And your stepmother?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Despite their fluency in Russian, you never acquired any
fluency? You just didn't acquire any familiarity with Russian?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Except your understanding of a few words?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I didn't.

Mr. JENNER. In any event you are unable to speak it?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. When Oswald came to your house that evening, did he speak
English or Russian?

Mrs. GIBSON. He spoke English to us and Russian to Marina.

Mr. JENNER. When he arrived, did he speak with his child?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, yes.

Mr. JENNER. In what language did he speak with the child?

Mrs. GIBSON. Russian.

Mr. JENNER. That was not merely small talk? All of his conversation
with his child was in Russian?

Mrs. GIBSON. Some was small talk. You could tell that he was just
playing around, and when he really talked to her, it was in Russian. Of
course once in a while he'd lapse into English.

Mr. JENNER. You minded the child June while Marina was at the dentist?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. And also the following day while she was at the dentist?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. How did you get along with the child?

Mrs. GIBSON. Not very well.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that.

Mrs. GIBSON. Pardon? I didn't understand you.

Mr. JENNER. You say you didn't get along very well with the child.
State it more fully to me factually; what the problems were.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, the minute Marina left, the child would start to
cry. She whimpered all the time. I couldn't feed her. Every time I got
near her she'd scream. She never slept. She's a very difficult child to
get along with. She was not at all affectionate to anybody else but to
her own parents.

Mr. JENNER. Do you think she found it strange to have anyone speak to
her in English as distinguished from Russian?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know if it was the English. I don't believe she
had ever been with anybody but her parents and I think that might have
had a lot to do with it, plus she was very spoiled, very catered to by
her mother and her father.

Mr. JENNER. There were subsequent occasions when you visited the
Oswalds or they visited you or Marina visited you or you visited Marina?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Drawing on the whole span of your acquaintance with the
Oswalds, rather than merely those first 2 days, did you ever hear Lee
Oswald address his child other than in Russian?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, like I said, sometimes he'd lapse into English. I
imagine it was mainly for our benefit, more so than the child's. I
mean normally he probably spoke to the child alone or when he was with
Marina always in Russian. He never spoke English to her ever or even
tried to teach her English, never attempted to.

Mr. JENNER. That is he never spoke to Marina other than in Russian, and
as you say, he never tried to teach her English?

Mrs. GIBSON. He never tried to teach her English, never, not one word.

Mr. JENNER. Did that strike you and your husband Gary as a little out
of the ordinary?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, we told him we thought that it was extremely stupid
and we asked him why, and he said that he didn't want to lose his
Russian. She, of course--in Russia I believe she worked in a pharmacy.
Wasn't she a pharmacist? And therefore we said to be able to get a
license over here she would have to speak English, and it didn't seem
to bother him. I think he didn't like the idea of her having more
education than he did. I think he wanted her to remain solely dependent
on him.

Mr. JENNER. During all the period that you and your husband were
acquainted with the Oswalds, was there ever any discussion about either
of them returning to Russia?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; he did not want to go back.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say that?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes. He disliked Russia just like he disliked the United
States.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression of him? Was he looking for utopia?

Mrs. GIBSON. I'd say so. He didn't agree with communism and he didn't
agree with capitalism. He had his own ideas completely on government.

Mr. JENNER. Would you please call on your recollection and tell us
what you recall as to what his beliefs, political beliefs, were, as he
expressed them?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, I'd say that his beliefs were more socialistic than
anything else. I mean he believed in the perfect government, free of
want and need, and free of taxation, free of discrimination, free of
any police force, the right to be able to do exactly what he pleased,
exactly when he pleased, just total and complete freedom in everything.

Mr. JENNER. Did he talk in terms of any obligation to this so-called
perfect state?

Mrs. GIBSON. No. Actually I think he believed in no government
whatsoever, just a perfect place where people lived happily all
together and no religion, nothing of any sort, no ties and no holds to
anything except himself.

Mr. JENNER. Did he ever discuss in that connection the necessity for
making a contribution to that society; working himself? Or was this a
Utopia in which he was to be free to do what he pleased, work or not as
he saw fit?

Mrs. GIBSON. I really don't know if he planned to work or not. I don't
know what Lee wanted to do in life. I think he wanted to be a very
important person without putting anything into it at all.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have any impression of resentment on his part?

Mrs. GIBSON. He resented any type of authority. He expected to be the
highest paid immediately, the best liked, the highest skilled. He
resented any people in high places, any people of any authority in
government or, oh, in let's say the police force or anything like
that, or in your Army, Navy, Marines or whatever he was in.

Mr. JENNER. Were there discussions between your husband and him on
these subjects?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; quite frequently. They argued a lot about it.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion--you say he wanted to be the
highest paid, he wanted to be the leader and that sort of thing. Did
your husband raise with him any necessity on his part to qualify
himself for those positions and that high pay?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, my husband told him you can't be something for
nothing. He said you can't expect to get high pay and receive a good
position with no education and no ambition, no particular goal, no
anything. Well, he just expected a lot for nothing.

Mr. JENNER. You have the impression that he was not an ambitious
person, ambitious in the sense of willing to devote himself to an
objective and work toward something?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't think he knew what he wanted.

Mr. JENNER. As distinguished from just being given to him or falling in
his lap?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't think he knew what he wanted, and I don't
think he was too interested in working toward anything. He expected
things to be just given to him on a silver platter. But in his ideas,
he was extremely devoted.

Mr. JENNER. He was devoted to his concepts?

Mrs. GIBSON. To his ideas as to how he thought. You couldn't change his
mind no matter what you said to him.

Mr. JENNER. He was rigid in his views then?

Mrs. GIBSON. Very, very rigid in his ideas.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say about Russia during these periods when you
had these discussions?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, he said he was very disappointed in Russia. Russia
was not what he thought it would be. It was not the ideal place, that
Communism was not the ideal government, that he disliked Communism just
as he disliked capitalism, that he disliked Russia very much.

Mr. JENNER. Did he tell you about his life in Russia? You were curious
about it and your husband too, I assume?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he told us bits and pieces about it, and then of
course he gave us a manuscript to read. He told us quite a bit about
Russia, yes.

Mr. JENNER. Would you please state what you recall as to what he said
in that connection?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, I can't recall any specific thing. I recall that he
said he was quite sick over there; this didn't hold too well. He said
he was treated with a little more deference than the next ordinary
Russian person because he was American, that he had a terrific time
leaving Russia, and that it scared him very much.

Mr. JENNER. You mean terrific in the sense of difficulty?

Mrs. GIBSON. A very difficult time. I think he said it took him a year
to be able to get out of Russia. He almost didn't make it. It scared
him very much. He was supposed to give over his citizenship and become
a citizen of Russia to be able to work there, but he didn't do this,
and he was still able to work there. He didn't know why exactly, but
they allowed him to work there anyway. But they kept pressuring him
to give up his citizenship to be able to work in Russia, get working
papers.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us more about that. Tell us everything you remember as
to what he said about the fact that they pressured him to give up his
citizenship so he could stay in Russia and work.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, I don't know how you consider pressuring him. They
kept suggesting that he should give up his citizenship to be able to
work in Russia; otherwise, why was he there? If he was there obviously
he wanted to become a Russian. To be able to work in Russia you were
supposed to be a Russian citizen. You had to give up your citizenship.
And he kept objecting to this. I guess he was scared. He didn't really
want to go as far as giving up his American citizenship.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about his course of conduct when
he first went to Russia, any attempted surrender by him of his
citizenship at that time voluntarily?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't recall that he did say anything about
voluntarily giving up his citizenship; no. He might have. I don't
recall that.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any discussion as to how he met Marina; and their
courtship and marriage?

Mrs. GIBSON. There was. I don't remember too much of it. I think he
met her in Minsk. I believe he was working there at a factory that
manufactured television chassis, and he met her, I don't know exactly
how. I think he met her when he was sick in the hospital. I don't know
what was wrong with him. And they I guess went out from there, and I
guess, I don't know how long they went out, and they got married.

Mr. JENNER. When you say "went out" you meant began to date?

Mrs. GIBSON. Dating; yes. I don't know exactly what you do in Russia.
And I think she wanted to come to the United States very badly.

Mr. JENNER. Would you elaborate on that, calling of course on your
recollection of what was said which gave you these impressions? That
is, what you learned from her or from conversations with him in her
presence?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I guess this was rather hearsay. I think she told this
to my stepmother in conversation, that she wanted very much to come to
the United States to make a better life for herself, that she wasn't
very much interested in politics, just in a better place to live.
Supposedly this is the reason she married Lee.

Mr. JENNER. That was your impression in any event?

Mrs. GIBSON. This is what I was told, yes.

Mr. JENNER. Nothing occurred during the period of time that you had
this acquaintanceship with the Oswalds that disabused you of that
impression?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; and I wouldn't say there was a tremendous amount of
love lost between them.

Mr. JENNER. Between Marina and Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right. They quarreled quite a lot.

Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us about this lack of rapport between Marina
and Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, they fought quite a bit. They fought in Russian,
always verbally when I saw them, but when she was living with Mrs. Hall
in Fort Worth, I was told that he beat her up on numerous occasions,
physically assaulted her, and that Mrs. Hall and her, oh, I don't know
what you would call him, her fiance, Alex----

Mr. JENNER. Is that Alex, Alexander Kleinlerer?

Mrs. GIBSON. I guess so. I don't know his name.

Mr. JENNER. Describe him to us.

Mrs. GIBSON. Describe him?

Mr. JENNER. Physically.

Mrs. GIBSON. He was short, very dark, moustache, black moustache,
European dresser, an accent, very much the gangster type in his looks,
very oily looking, very oily in personality, actually a rather creepy
customer. He spoke Russian fluently. I think he spoke quite a few
languages fluently. He, I believe, was born or originated in Paris. I
have no idea what his occupation was. But he did not get along with Lee
at all. He had numerous arguments with him over Marina and how he beat
her.

Mr. JENNER. Did any of this occur in your presence?

Mrs. GIBSON. One afternoon he was telling Lee off very, very----

Mr. JENNER. Tell us where this occurred?

Mrs. GIBSON. This occurred in Mrs. Hall's home in Fort Worth.

Mr. JENNER. You were present?

Mrs. GIBSON. And my husband; we were both present.

Mr. JENNER. And who else please?

Mrs. GIBSON. Mrs. Hall and Marina were in the other room. Lee and Alex,
and he was telling Lee off in no uncertain terms about how he beat up
Marina, and about his whole outlook on life. He was really giving him a
tongue lashing.

Mr. JENNER. And what response did he obtain from Lee?

Mrs. GIBSON. Very sullen, very sharp answers. In fact I thought there
was going to be a fight there for a minute.

Mr. JENNER. Did Lee deny at that time in your presence, these
accusations being uttered by Alexander Kleinlerer?

Mrs. GIBSON. He said it was none of his business.

Mr. JENNER. But he didn't deny that he had done this?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. He just said it was none of Kleinlerer's business?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. Had either you or your husband ever--did either you or your
husband ever talk to Lee Oswald about his treatment of Marina?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; we never talked to him about beating his wife. We just
talked to him about how he should teach her English, how it was very
important for her to know English.

Mr. JENNER. I take it that that phase, that is the teaching of English
to her, that sort of conversation occurred several times during your
acquaintanceship with Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, yes; very often.

Mr. JENNER. And his response always was that he didn't want to lose----

Mrs. GIBSON. He didn't want to lose his Russian.

Mr. JENNER. Was there anything said by you or Gary that he could speak
to her in Russian and she could speak with him in Russian but at the
same time she could be taught English?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Neither you nor your husband Gary urged that alternative?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; we just gave up.

Mr. JENNER. What was Lee Oswald's personality? Was he a gracious
person, ungracious, was he rude, or was he not? Was he appreciative?

Mrs. GIBSON. He could be very, very rude. He appreciated absolutely
nothing you did for him. He never thanked you for anything. He seemed
to expect it of you.

Mr. JENNER. We are going to get into all that eventually, but you and
your husband Gary were very helpful to him, reasonably so in any event.
You did a number of things for him; did you not?

Mrs. GIBSON. I'd say we did a number of things for him that we didn't
have to do, and we certainly didn't need to do, and we certainly didn't
owe him anything. But we did try to help.

Mr. JENNER. Now in the face of all that, you say that at no time did he
express any appreciation or thanks.

Mrs. GIBSON. I think the only time he ever said thank you was when we
moved him from Fort Worth to Dallas. I think it was a very brief thank
you, and that was that.

Mr. JENNER. But otherwise, he neither expressed nor did you feel any
evidence of appreciation on his part for what you and your husband did?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I didn't feel anything. I fed his wife quite a few
meals. He never offered me any reimbursement of any type for it. He
never thanked me. He just seemed to act as if we owed it to him, and I
felt that I didn't owe him a thing.

Mr. JENNER. What about Marina, on the other hand, in this connection?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think Marina was appreciative.

Mr. JENNER. Discounting the difficulty of communication?

Mrs. GIBSON. I had the feeling she was appreciative; yes. But she was
exceedingly lazy. She would do nothing to help. The only thing she
would do would be to take care of her child. She would do this, thank
goodness, but otherwise she would do nothing to help. She wouldn't help
with the dishes or clearing the table or preparing the meal, cleaning
the apartment, anything pertaining to the extra work I had to do
because she was there. Mrs. Hall had the same complaint.

Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Hall expressed this complaint to you?

Mrs. GIBSON. Exactly the same complaint: that Marina slept very late,
which she didn't do in my apartment but she did there, that she did
not help with the house, that she didn't do anything really; just sat
around and took care of the baby.

Mr. JENNER. Over this period--let me fix the period of time. You first
met them, your present recollection is, sometime the latter part of
August 1962. When was the last time you saw either of the Oswalds?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, when I returned a manuscript to Lee Oswald, it could
have been either the end of November or the middle of December. I am
not sure which.

Mr. JENNER. 1962?

Mrs. GIBSON. 1962; that is right.

Mr. JENNER. Over this period of approximately, let us say, 3-1/2 months
in 1962, how many times did Marina stay in your home? You have given
one occasion.

Mrs. GIBSON. It must have been at least two or three, no more than that.

Mr. JENNER. Over that 3-1/2 month period, the Oswalds were in your home
no more than two or three times that is on visits, one or the other of
them?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; he was. She was only there one other time to visit. He
popped in and out frequently. She was in Fort Worth at the time, and I
didn't see her.

Mr. JENNER. Going back to this following or second day of Marina's
visit in August, I take it your stepmother picked her up and took her
to the dentist on the second day as well?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. Did she return to Fort Worth that day?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think she took a bus that afternoon to Fort Worth.

Mr. JENNER. Did she go to the bus station by herself or was she taken?

Mrs. GIBSON. My stepmother took her.

Mr. JENNER. Did you learn where the Oswalds were living or staying at
that time? That is, is this the first occasion that you met them?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, they must have been staying at that duplex.

Mr. JENNER. On Mercedes Street?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; that is where they must have been staying.

Mr. JENNER. Were you ever in that home or apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I was.

Mr. JENNER. When was the first occasion you were in that duplex?

Mrs. GIBSON. It was Sunday afternoon somewhere, it must have been about
2 weeks or more after I first met them. Gary and I went over to visit
them in Fort Worth.

Mr. JENNER. Weekday or weekend?

Mrs. GIBSON. Sunday.

Mr. JENNER. On a Sunday. This was then in September of 1962?

Mrs. GIBSON. It must have been early September or late August.

Mr. JENNER. This was a visit on your part?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is right.

Mr. JENNER. Were they aware of the fact that you were going to visit
them?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. When you arrived there, was anyone there?

Mrs. GIBSON. I am not very clear on that point. It is possible that
Lee's mother was just leaving. I am not sure. She was either just
leaving or she had just left before we came. I don't remember. I am not
too clear on if I met her passing as she was going out or if I didn't
meet her.

Mr. JENNER. How did you know where they lived?

Mrs. GIBSON. Lee I believe--Lee gave us their address.

Mr. JENNER. On what occasion did he give you their address?

Mrs. GIBSON. It must have been one of the times he stopped by, dropped
in. I don't really know.

Mr. JENNER. I don't know as I asked you this. Did he visit at your home
at anytime during those first 2 days that Marina stayed with you?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he came to visit the first evening.

Mr. JENNER. Had you expected him?

Mrs. GIBSON. I had thought that he might be coming. I believe she had
told my stepmother that Lee was dropping by or my stepmother had told
me. Somebody had said something.

Mr. JENNER. That was the first occasion on which you met Lee Harvey
Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Did he stay the evening and then leave?

Mrs. GIBSON. He stayed about an hour and then he left.

Mr. JENNER. And what did you notice with respect to the relations
between Lee Oswald and Marina on that first occasion?

Mrs. GIBSON. I'd say they got along fairly well.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression as to whether he was employed at
that time?

Mrs. GIBSON. I didn't get any impression one way or the other.

Mr. JENNER. Did you get any impression in that respect when you and
your husband, Gary, visited them on the Sunday afternoon you have
mentioned?

Mrs. GIBSON. I believe he talked about his employment, but I am not
sure. He must have. They must have talked about it.

Mr. JENNER. Your impression was he was then working at some kind of
employment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I mean it was just normal to assume. He had an
apartment and a child and a wife. He must have been working.

Mr. JENNER. Were there any others than those you have mentioned who
were at the apartment on that Sunday afternoon; you have mentioned the
possibility of Lee Harvey Oswald's mother and, of course, there was Lee
and the baby and Marina.

Mrs. GIBSON. Later on in the early evening some people came to visit,
some of the Russian colony from Fort Worth and Dallas.

I don't recall the names. I think Mrs. Hall and Alex were there.
Otherwise, there must have been four other people, four or five other
people besides them.

Mr. JENNER. I will mention some names. Mamantov?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't know that name.

Mr. JENNER. Meller?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. You are familiar with the name Meller, aren't you?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe so.

Mr. JENNER. I think you mentioned Mrs. Hall and Kleinlerer.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. As possibly having been there. Mr. and Mrs. Max Clark?

Mrs. GIBSON. That is a possibility. The more I think about it, it is
possible, but I am not sure.

Mr. JENNER. You were acquainted with or aware of the Clarks?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I believe I knew them.

Mr. JENNER. They were friends of your father and stepmother?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I am not positive that I knew them very well, but I
have a feeling, the name rings a bell definitely.

Mr. JENNER. Are you familiar with the name George Bouhe?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Was George Bouhe there?

Mrs. GIBSON. I am not sure, but the more I think about it, you asked me
this question earlier, I think he was there. I think he was the extra
man that was there.

Mr. JENNER. What impression did you get as to whether it had been
expected that this group was to come by or did they just happen by?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I think they just dropped in.

Mr. JENNER. Did they stay very long?

Mrs. GIBSON. I left before they left. I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. What was the nature of the conversation on that occasion?

Mrs. GIBSON. I couldn't really tell. A lot of it was in Russian. You
couldn't tell what was going on.

Mr. JENNER. These were by and large Russian-speaking people?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Describe the apartment to me, will you please?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, my. Well, it was rather nice. It was clean. There was
a living room and a kitchen and a bedroom and a bath, hardwood floors,
good paint. It was a duplex. A large backyard. The furniture was
rundown but it was usable. All in all it was not a bad apartment.

Mr. JENNER. What impressions did you get of Lee Harvey Oswald
throughout the 3-1/2 month period, as to his dress and his self-respect
and care?

Mrs. GIBSON. He was not a very clean person. In fact, I'd say he wasn't
clean at all. He seemed to wear the same shirt for week after week.
Every time we saw him he had the same clothes on. Fairly clean-shaven,
but otherwise he was definitely not a clean person in dress.

Mr. JENNER. And Marina on the other hand?

Mrs. GIBSON. I'd say she was fairly clean.

Mr. JENNER. What was Lee Oswald's attitude and his posture with respect
to other people? Was he reasonably polite and respectful? How did he
conduct himself in the presence of others?

Mrs. GIBSON. It would depend on who the people were. He could be very
polite if he wished. He could be very sarcastic, very blunt if he
wished. He could be a very friendly person if he wished, and he could
be very quiet if he wished. It just depended on who the people were.

Mr. JENNER. Which was predominant?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, I don't know. It was really a mixture. He was easy,
not too hard to get along with as far as we were concerned. We argued
with him but it was always a friendly argument. When I saw him with
other people, he was as friendly, smiling, but with his wife he could
be very quiet, very brooding. That is about all I can tell you.

Mr. JENNER. It has been said of him by some people that he was somewhat
of an introvert, very quiet, not seeking the company of others.

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I wouldn't say he would seek out company, but when
they came or when he went to visit them or us, he was always very--he
didn't seem to be introverted; no. He seemed to be quite friendly,
quite extroverted, no trouble expressing himself. He didn't sit in
silence for hours.

Mr. JENNER. What about his regard, his attitude toward others with
respect to--that is did he--let's take your father's folks, did he have
respect for your father? Did he like him?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he liked my father very much. He had a great deal of
respect for him.

Mr. JENNER. And your husband Gary?

Mrs. GIBSON. I would imagine he did.

Mr. JENNER. What is your impression?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I'd say Marina probably liked Gary more than Lee,
though.

Mr. JENNER. Lee did visit at your home?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And he did on occasion seek out your husband?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And your husband occasionally sought out him?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Did Lee express any views with respect to others in that
milieux, that company, the Halls, the Mellers, the Clarks, Bouhe, the
Voshinins, the Russian emigree colony?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, he liked Mr. Bouhe very much and he expected a lot
of him. I think he thought that Mr. Bouhe might be his key to getting
a good job. Mrs. Hall now, he liked her, but he said she was a crude,
coarse woman. I think maybe he really deeply didn't like her that well.

Alex--what did you say his name was?

Mr. JENNER. Kleinlerer.

Mrs. GIBSON. He didn't like him at all, and the other people you
mention, I imagine he has talked about them, but I can't place them, so
I don't know his opinion on them.

Mr. JENNER. These people were trying to help, were they not?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; especially George Bouhe.

Mr. JENNER. What was Lee's attitude toward that effort?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know. I don't know why they were trying to help
him. He didn't deserve it. They didn't owe it to him. Yet he seemed
to, I got the feeling he thought they did. Why, I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. Did you get the feeling at any time that he was
contemptuous of any of them?

Mrs. GIBSON. When they didn't come up with something he wanted; yes.
I'd say George Bouhe was the one that stuck by him the most, more than
my father, more than any of them. Mrs. Hall got disgusted with the
whole thing, and especially, well, with both of them really, a lot with
Marina and a lot with Lee.

She got very disgusted with the whole situation. My father did, too.
George Bouhe seemed to be the only one that sort of stuck by them.

Mr. JENNER. Why did your father become disgusted with them?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, just in general, with Lee's lack of being able to
get a good job or being able to really stick with anything, his
treatment of his wife, his treatment of his fellowmen, just his total
indifference. My father just got very aggravated with the whole thing,
got aggravated with Marina for taking Lee's abuse, and he just got fed
up.

Mr. JENNER. Now, there came an occasion when he either lost or quit his
position in Fort Worth, isn't that so?

Mrs. GIBSON. I guess so.

Mr. JENNER. Well, that----

Mrs. GIBSON. I imagine, I don't know if he lost it or if he quit. I
believe he said he quit.

Mr. JENNER. All right, now that you have said that, the fact is that
he did quit. Now, to help orient yourself, that occurred on the 8th of
October 1962, which was, I think, a Tuesday but I will check on that to
make sure. That was a Monday.

Now, between that Sunday afternoon which would be either late in August
or some time in September, and the 8th of October, which was a Monday,
when he left the Leslie Welding Co., had you seen the Oswalds?

Mrs. GIBSON. Between when?

Mr. JENNER. Between the Sunday that you visited them and the 8th of
October.

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe we had. We might have. He might have
popped in. I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. You have mentioned----

Mrs. GIBSON. Is this before he stayed at the YMCA? This is before,
isn't it?

Mr. JENNER. Yes. To help you in that respect, he stayed at the YMCA
October 15 through October 19, 1962.

Mrs. GIBSON. He might have popped in. I don't recall whether he did or
not.

Mr. JENNER. Now, during that period of time, from that Sunday to
October 8, had Marina stayed with you?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe so.

Mr. JENNER. You do recall Lee Oswald being in Fort Worth at the YMCA,
however, do you?

Mrs. GIBSON. In Fort Worth?

Mr. JENNER. I mean in Dallas.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; we took him there.

Mr. JENNER. You did take him to the YMCA?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, that was the 15th of October?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. 1962. Where was Marina then?

Mrs. GIBSON. She might have been with us at the time.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether you went to Fort Worth and picked him
up and took him to the YMCA?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe we did.

Mr. JENNER. Give me your best recollection of that circumstance.

Mrs. GIBSON. All I can remember is letting him off at the YMCA. I am
almost positive we wouldn't go to Fort Worth, though, to pick him up.
No; I don't believe so.

Mr. JENNER. That was a Monday.

Mrs. GIBSON. It was the afternoon when we dropped him at the Y.

Mr. JENNER. And you have no present recollection where you picked him
up, whether----

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Whether he had come to your house or what the circumstances
were?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I sure don't. I think he might have come to our house,
but I am not sure.

Mr. JENNER. Did Marina stay with you during this October period at all?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think she stayed with us the time that he was in the
YMCA.

Mr. JENNER. That is?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think she stayed with us about 5 days.

Mr. JENNER. That is 5 days?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe she stayed with us the full time, no.

Mr. JENNER. But she did stay with you during a period?

Mrs. GIBSON. A few; yes.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have a recollection of how she got there, whether
you went or your husband went and picked her up and brought her to your
home or whether Lee brought her?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe Lee brought her. I think it would
be more--it would be normal to assume, I don't remember this, that
my stepmother or my father must have brought her, because I know we
didn't. I don't recall picking her up at all.

Mr. JENNER. But she stayed with you then, you think, during the period
that he was at the YMCA?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Now, did Lee visit at your home while she was there during
this YMCA period?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether your husband Gary went over to the
YMCA and picked him up and brought him to your home?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't think so. I think he came by bus, or walked.
That was possible, too. It wasn't that far.

Mr. JENNER. Would you locate your apartment at 3519 Fairmont with
respect to the location of the Dallas YMCA. That was downtown?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, it was almost downtown. I believe it was on Maple
Avenue or very near Maple Avenue.

Mr. JENNER. That is, the YMCA was?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; and Maple Avenue, we were only one block off of Maple
Avenue. We ran parallel with Maple, Fairmont did, and we were only 1
block off of Maple, and I'd say it was, oh, maybe 12 blocks from the
YMCA.

Mr. JENNER. An easy walk?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; 12 or 14, maybe farther, but it was not a real
long walk. It is possible to walk the distance. Bus service was very
frequent and very easy to get.

Mr. JENNER. Now, did you become aware, you and your husband, of the
fact that Lee obtained a position at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall on the 12th
of October? That is while he was at the YMCA, he had already obtained
this position and had begun to work at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall?

Mrs. GIBSON. He began to work there while he was at the Y?

Mr. JENNER. He went to work on the 12th of October 1962.

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh my goodness. Well, it is possible that we knew this. I
know, I remember that he was employed there because I remember he used
to tell Gary how he liked the job, how that interested him.

Now, when I thought he was employed there I don't know. I remember
when he was at the Y that he was looking for a place to live in the
Dallas-Oak Cliff area.

Mr. JENNER. Did you or your ex-husband Gary or both of you help him to
look?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I believe one evening we went out with them and
looked over the prospective places, places that we knew of, the place
where we used to live--and Worthington, and just in the general
low-rent area which would be accessible to where he was going to be
working.

Mr. JENNER. So that you knew at that time where he was working or going
to work?

Mrs. GIBSON. We knew the location of the place where he was working.

Now, I am not sure if we knew that he was working already or if we
thought he was still unemployed, not unemployed but already employed
but not working yet.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall Mrs. Hall having been involved in an
automobile accident?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That was in October, was it not, 1962?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know what the month was, but I imagine it was. It
must have been in the latter part of October.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall Marina residing with Mrs. Hall?

Mrs. GIBSON. She was with Mrs. Hall before the accident and after the
accident and while Mrs. Hall was in the hospital she lived at the house.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall also that Mrs. Hall, after she returned from
the hospital, went to New York City?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I do.

Mr. JENNER. And that while she was in New York City, that Marina stayed
at her home also?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; she did.

Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether during that period Lee Oswald stayed at
the Halls'?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he did. I believe, while Mrs. Hall was in the
hospital; he stayed with Marina while she was alone for 2, 3, or 4
days, something like that. He was there off and on. He spent quite a
few nights there, I know this.

Mr. JENNER. Were there any occasions when you and your husband or
either of you were at the Halls' when Oswald was there?

Mrs. GIBSON. I believe we took him to Fort Worth once to visit, and we
stayed for supper, and Mrs. Hall was there and she cooked us supper.
This is before her accident, and Alex was there and Marina and Gary and
myself.

Mr. JENNER. This is the occasion to which you earlier made a reference,
is it, or had you done so?

Mrs. GIBSON. It was the occasion where Alex and Lee got into an
argument; yes. And this was prior to Mrs. Hall's accident. We stayed
until fairly late in the evening. I can't remember if we brought Lee
back with us or if he spent the night. It would seem logical, I think
we brought Lee back with us.

Mr. JENNER. You brought him back to where?

Mrs. GIBSON. To Dallas.

Mr. JENNER. To where in Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know. I can't remember.

Mr. JENNER. This was before he stayed at the YMCA?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; this was after.

Mr. JENNER. This was after Mrs. Hall returned from the hospital?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; this was before her accident. This is while Marina was
there.

Mr. JENNER. To help orient you, she was in the hospital from the 18th
of October 1962 to the 26th of October 1962.

Mrs. GIBSON. This is before her accident. I think only a couple of days
before her accident or a day before, because I remember how shocked I
was when I heard that she had been in an accident. It was only a day or
two before, so where would he have been living, at the Y, wouldn't he,
at that time?

Mr. JENNER. He would be at the Y.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. He was at the Y on the 15th.

Mrs. GIBSON. I imagine that is where we dropped him then.

Mr. JENNER. Do you know of your own personal knowledge the fact that
Lee stayed with Marina at the Halls' from time to time?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; Mrs. Hall told me--he told me and Marina----

Mr. JENNER. Oswald told you?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; and Marina told me in a roundabout fashion.

Mr. JENNER. How?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, she'd tell, you know, Mrs. Hall to tell me something
and Mrs. Hall would tell me, that is how, or through Lee, or through
gestures or a dictionary she would be able to tell me a few words.

Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether or where, I will put it that way, where
Lee stayed between the 19th of October 1962, when he left the Y, and
November 3, 1962, when they moved into the Elsbeth Street apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. I know that he stayed part of the time, I'd say a good
portion of the time, at Mrs. Hall's. Now, whether he had another
residence I don't know. I know he spent a few evenings with my father.
If he spent a night there I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. When you say he spent a few evenings with your father, I
infer from that--and if my inference is wrong please tell me--that
there were occasions when he stayed overnight in your father's home.

Mrs. GIBSON. No; not occasions. I think possibly one or two times. But
he would be over there evenings and they would talk. Then he would
leave. Now, where he went to I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. But your recollection is that there were at least several
occasions in which he stayed overnight in your father's home?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I am trying very hard to think of where he stayed. It
is such a very vague recollection, so vague it is barely there, that he
had a room. But I don't know where.

Mr. JENNER. During this period?

Mrs. GIBSON. During that period; yes.

Mr. JENNER. From the 19th to the 3d?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; it is so vague but it is there, that he had a room
somewhere. Where I don't know. I just can't think.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have a recollection that either you or your husband
ever went to visit him at some room?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; Gary possibly, but me, no. Gary might have picked him
up some place, but not me. I don't recall. It is just so vague and
maybe it is just because you think there was one that I say this. But I
feel that there was a room some place.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection that your stepmother gave you
at any time an address?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't.

Mr. JENNER. At which Lee, a place where Lee was staying during this
period from October 19 to November 3?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't. She might have, but I have no recollection of
it whatsoever. But then we weren't on too tremendously good terms and I
might have just not even thought of what she said.

Mr. JENNER. In any event, it is your recollection that during this
period, October 19 through November 3, that Lee did stay a good portion
of the time at the Halls?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. With Marina?

Mrs. GIBSON. It seems to me that he had a place to live somewhere near
where he was working, somewhere easily accessible on foot, to where he
was working.

Mr. JENNER. That is your former husband Gary's recollection, and he
seemed reasonably confident that you would recall the address.

Mrs. GIBSON. No, no; no idea. Did Gary mention something about one
night we were in Oak Cliff and we were looking for some place.

Mr. JENNER. He said you were looking for Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. Is that what he said? And we went up and down and up
and down and we never found the place. I recall one evening, I don't
remember what we were looking for, but I recall this.

Mr. JENNER. You were looking for Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. Is that who we were looking for?

Mr. JENNER. No; I----

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know, I am not sure, but one evening Gary and I
were looking for some place, and I don't know where it was. But it was
in Oak Cliff. It was right over the river. And we went up and down and
back and forth for a good hour looking for this address. And I can't
think of where it was, and we never found it. I do remember that. We
never found it.

Mr. JENNER. But it had something to do with Oswald?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think it did. I think it had to do with a room that he
had over there, but where it was, the address, I don't know. I never
knew Oak Cliff very well in the first place.

Mr. JENNER. You say he was now employed and could afford a room?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; but I don't know where. I--we couldn't find it
wherever it was, because we looked.

Mr. JENNER. But you did have an address at that time?

Mrs. GIBSON. I had an address for something I was looking for. What
it was I don't know. If I was looking for him or if I was looking for
somebody else, if Gary was looking for somebody, I don't recall. But
it could possibly be that it was him that we were looking for. I don't
know how Gary thinks I can remember an address, though. I don't.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall an occasion when you assisted Marina and Lee
to move into the Elsbeth Street apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I do.

Mr. JENNER. What day of the week was that?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know. Weekend.

Mr. JENNER. Was that a weekend?

Mrs. GIBSON. It seems reasonable that it would have been a weekend,
but then with Gary working as a cabdriver, I don't know if it was or
not, because he sometimes worked weekends. They were good days to work.
Saturday was very good. Was it a Sunday?

Mr. JENNER. Yes. Wait a minute, it was a Saturday, the 3d of November
1962, was a Saturday.

Mrs. GIBSON. Did we move him in on that day or did he start rent from
that day?

Mr. JENNER. The advice of the landlord or manager of the building was
they moved in on the third, but do you recall that it was a weekend
rather than a weekday?

Mrs. GIBSON. I wouldn't know. It could have been. It seems more logical
that it would have been a weekend.

Mr. JENNER. Now, tell us about that from the beginning. What led up to
it, how you participated, the extent you participated with your husband?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, when we were over in Fort Worth visiting Mrs. Hall,
we had taken Lee over there to see Marina, we told them we would help
them move when he found a place, and he came by one evening or----

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. This then was after he had obtained a job?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes. He either called or came by one evening.

Mr. JENNER. Was Mrs. Hall home on that occasion when you went over to
see them?

Mrs. GIBSON. When we moved them or before, that other time?

Mr. JENNER. That other time.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; she was.

Mr. JENNER. So this was subsequent to October 26?

Mrs. GIBSON. And also we were over there to visit them also another
time after she had the accident, and I remember she was in bed.

Mr. JENNER. Was it before or after she went to the hospital?

Mrs. GIBSON. It was after, right after, when she came home and she was
still in bed. It was before she went to New York.

Mr. JENNER. She came back on the 26th of October?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; and we went over there and she was still in bed.

Mr. JENNER. Was that the occasion? Was he there?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Was that the occasion when you told him that you would help
him move?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. When he found a place?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I believe he said he was looking. And I believe----

Mr. JENNER. Lee was at the Halls' on that occasion?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I think we took him there.

Mr. JENNER. All right, he was not at the YMCA.

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. He was not staying at the Halls'?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; he came to our apartment.

Mr. JENNER. So he must have been staying somewhere in Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he must have been. He came to our apartment. I don't
ever recall taking him back to any place in particular, or picking
him up at any place in particular. See, that is my problem. But I do
remember the visit when she was in bed, and we told them that we would
help them move. And I guess he must have called us or come to visit
us about moving, and we took our car and I think, I don't know if we
rented a trailer, I think they rented a trailer in Fort Worth, I am not
sure, and left it in Dallas.

Mr. JENNER. Let's get it sequentially. You left your apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Lee came to your apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. In the morning was it?

Mrs. GIBSON. Morning or early afternoon.

Mr. JENNER. And then you left your apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. You, your husband, and Lee?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And where did you go?

Mrs. GIBSON. To drop the baby off.

Mr. JENNER. Your baby?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. With a sitter?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; to Mrs. Taylor, Gary's mother.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mrs. GIBSON. From there we went to Fort Worth to Mrs. Hall's, and then
Lee and Gary went to rent a trailer, and I stayed with Marina.

Mr. JENNER. Was Mrs. Hall home on that occasion?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Where was Mrs. Hall?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know. I guess she was in New York. So, they came
back with the trailer and we started to load up all the stuff, and
Alex----

Mr. JENNER. Kleinlerer?

Mrs. GIBSON. Kleinlerer came by, I guess to supervise the moving, to
see that nothing was taken of Mrs. Hall's, and he watched us move and
we got all their stuff out, and we took them to their apartment in Oak
Cliff, Elsbeth apartment, to move them in there. By then it was early
evening, and then we left them there. We looked over the apartment and
we left them there.

Mr. JENNER. Your husband rented that trailer?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think Lee did; didn't he? I don't think Gary paid for
it. Did Gary pay for it? I can't imagine Gary paying for it. He might
have, but I don't see it.

Mr. JENNER. Apart from that, did Lee thank you for spending the day?

Mrs. GIBSON. Very briefly, thank you, and that was all. Marina was not
happy with the apartment at all. She said it was filthy dirty, it was a
pigsty and she didn't want to stay there. Lee said it could be fixed up.

Mr. JENNER. What was their attitude toward each other on that occasion?

Mrs. GIBSON. They were arguing.

Mr. JENNER. During the day when you reached the Elsbeth Street
apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Not too much during the day but after she saw the
apartment she was very unhappy with it and they were arguing very much
when we left.

Mr. JENNER. Was it your impression she had not seen it?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe she had; no.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression of the apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. It was a hole. It was terrible, very dirty, very badly
kept, really quite a slum. It had possibilities to be fixed up. It was
large, quite large, built very strangely, little rooms here and there,
lots of doors, lots of windows. The floor had big bumps in it, you
know. It was like the building had shifted and you walked up hill, you
know, to get from one side of the room to the other. It was not a nice
place; no.

Mr. JENNER. Was it a brick structure, wooden?

Mrs. GIBSON. It was brick outside, dark red brick. It was a small
apartment building. I think two stories, overrun with weeds and garbage
and people.

Mr. JENNER. Did you visit the Oswald's in that apartment thereafter?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether your husband did?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think he told me when I came back to Dallas in December
that he visited them once.

Mr. JENNER. I take it then that sometime after November 3, you left
Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I left Dallas the latter part of November.

Mr. JENNER. And just to orient you, where did you go?

Mrs. GIBSON. I went to Tucson, Ariz.

Mr. JENNER. You were with your aunt?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I was by myself.

Mr. JENNER. Had you lived in Tucson?

Mrs. GIBSON. Before that, no; not really. I had been to boarding school
there a few years, and I lived in Tucson 1 year with my aunt in a house
that we rented, and her husband, but I had not lived in Tucson before
this.

Mr. JENNER. Let's identify her. What was her name?

Mrs. GIBSON. Mrs. Tilton.

Mr. JENNER. What was her full name?

Mrs. GIBSON. Do you want her first name?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mrs. GIBSON. Nancy.

Mr. JENNER. Nancy Tilton?

Mrs. GIBSON. Nancy Sands Tilton.

Mr. JENNER. And her married name?

Mrs. GIBSON. Mrs. Charles Elliott Tilton III.

Mr. JENNER. And in previous years you had as a young girl, even as a
child, lived with her; had you not?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That was a good many years?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; 14 years.

Mr. JENNER. Fourteen years. Was that in Arizona or Florida?

Mrs. GIBSON. It was all around. I lived in Vermont in the summer,
Arizona in the winter, Florida sometimes. It depended.

Mr. JENNER. Your aunt was a person of means I gather?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. You have already mentioned that you saw Lee Harvey Oswald
when you returned from Arizona?

Mrs. GIBSON. I am not sure if it was then or if it was right before I
left.

Mr. JENNER. Before you left for what?

Mrs. GIBSON. Arizona.

Mr. JENNER. And where did you see him?

Mrs. GIBSON. At the apartment. He came by to pick up a manuscript that
I had of his.

Mr. JENNER. That is at your apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. I show you a document that is in evidence in this
proceeding as Commission Exhibit No. 95. Would you examine that and
tell me whether that is the manuscript to which you have made reference
several times.

Mrs. GIBSON. I believe it is. Yes; it is.

Mr. JENNER. Tell me the circumstances under which you first saw that
document and how it came into your possession?

Mrs. GIBSON. I asked Lee if he had written anything on Russia that I
could read, if he had any material, and he said yes, he did; that he
had a manuscript that he had written on general life in Russia and I
asked him if I could read it and he said yes and he gave it to me. He
brought it over one evening. I have no idea of the date or the time.

Mr. JENNER. Was it reasonably early in the course of your acquaintance
with the Oswalds?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think it was before they moved to Dallas, to Oak Cliff.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever discuss the manuscript with him?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I did. I told him he should publish it and he said
no, that it was not for people to read.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever discuss its contents with him?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; a little bit. I asked him questions about it.

Mr. JENNER. Can you recall any of the inquiries you made of the
discussions you had with him regarding the substance of it?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, I asked him, I believe on this manuscript that it
was said that you could not move from town to town.

Mr. JENNER. In Russia?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; and he was telling me why.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say?

Mrs. GIBSON. He said that the housing problem was so difficult there
that once you got an apartment or a room in one city, that you had
to wait in line in another city to get housing, therefore, you were
not allowed to leave from one city to another unless you already
had housing and a job. But for him it was easier because he was an
American, and I guess as he said they were trying to impress him a
little bit.

Mr. JENNER. In that connection did he imply that he was free to move
about the country as he saw fit?

Mrs. GIBSON. Freer than Russians I would imagine. He did imply that he
was freer than they were.

Mr. JENNER. To move around?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say that he had at any time left Minsk to go
anywhere else?

Mrs. GIBSON. I believe he had been to Moscow.

Mr. JENNER. Was that in connection with his efforts to return to this
country?

Mrs. GIBSON. I have no idea. I think it was just to see the countryside.

Mr. JENNER. Would you look further through that manuscript and see if
your recollection is refreshed as to any other discussion you had with
him?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, we talked a little bit about clothing and food.

Mr. JENNER. That is a generalization. Tell me what you talked about.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, he said that the Russian people were very impressed
with his clothing, that they did not have the quality or the style
that he had. Also the sparseness of fruits, vegetables there. He told
them about the supermarkets we had here and how plentiful fruit and
vegetables were, how expensive butter and everything was in Russia,
like that, your dairy products, aside from milk, butter, and cottage
cheese, and all these things were extremely expensive and, well, like
gold. Education we talked about, how much higher their educational
standards are.

Mr. JENNER. Than ours?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say in that connection?

Mrs. GIBSON. They are much higher, that everybody is trained there to
do something. That they have what would be considered, well, like your
elementary school, and after you finished this required, oh, I don't
know what it is, 8 or 9 years of school, you take this test, and if
you pass this test you are admitted into what is considered college.
If you don't pass it, you are able to choose a vocational school that
you can go to to train you in some vocation, oh, like bricklayers or
electricians or plumbers or something like this. You are allowed to
choose whatever you want. You hear, he said, that women are laying
streets, let's say, in Russia and he said that isn't because they are
made to but this is because what they have chosen to do, what they want
to do. That is about the general gist of what he had to say.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall something about a time when little June was
baptized?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I do.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that, please.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, one evening there was a knock at the door and I went
to answer it and Mrs. Hall and Marina and June were outside, and Mrs.
Hall came in and told me that she had just brought Marina and June to
Dallas.

Mr. JENNER. Did Marina and the baby come in the apartment, too?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And Mrs. Hall said this in the presence of Marina?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Was your husband home?

Mrs. GIBSON. No. She said that they brought the baby to Dallas to be
baptized without Lee knowing it because he would object, and that
Marina had been brought up in Russia with religion, although it was
against the law there, and that she wanted her child to be baptized,
and that Lee objected so strongly to it that she did it on the sly,
and she asked me please not to tell him. And she left a box of clothes
of his there for me that she had bought him. It was his birthday, I
believe, the next day.

Mr. JENNER. Lee's birthday?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, he was born on the 18th of October 1939, so
this was the occasion when he was living at the YMCA?

Mrs. GIBSON. His birthday was the next day or something, or a couple of
days.

Mr. JENNER. He was at the YMCA from the 15th through the 19th, 1962?

Mrs. GIBSON. I am getting my days messed up, because I thought she
stayed with us while he was at the YMCA. She must not have. You know,
I can't place when she stayed with us. I can just place the period of
time that she stayed with us, you know, that it was not over 3 or 4
days.

Mr. JENNER. Could it have been right following his leaving the YMCA?

Mrs. GIBSON. It possibly could have been. I really don't know. But like
I said, that is something I forgot. Now that you know his birthday, you
can place when she was baptized and when she brought this box to me.

Mr. JENNER. She was baptized the day before his birthday?

Mrs. GIBSON. I am not sure if it was the day before or 2 days or 3
days, but it was real close to his birthday.

Mr. JENNER. Real close?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. The records indicate the baptism occurred on the 17th of
October, 1962.

Mrs. GIBSON. Then it must have been the day before.

Mr. JENNER. Which is the day before his birthday, but the occasion you
remember it was about his birthday time?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. They left a box of clothing or some gift?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, it had a shirt and a pair of sox and general things.

Mr. JENNER. These were new?

Mrs. GIBSON. Brand new.

Mr. JENNER. A gift?

Mrs. GIBSON. A gift; yes. From his wife.

Mr. JENNER. Didn't it seem strange to you at that time with him at the
YMCA they didn't ring him up or go by the YMCA and leave this birthday
gift?

Mrs. GIBSON. She didn't want him to know that she was in Dallas because
she didn't want him to know she had baptized the baby.

Mr. JENNER. Did Lee speak with you on that subject?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I guess it must have been the next day that he
dropped by and I gave him the box, and I didn't say anything about
this, but I think he had heard it. I think he had talked to Marina or
something on the telephone.

Mr. JENNER. He became aware when he came by the next day, which would
be his birthday, that they had----

Mrs. GIBSON. I think she told him on the telephone that she had
baptized the baby, and he asked me if I knew, and I said yes, and he
said, "Why didn't you tell me?" And I said, that it was not any of my
business.

Mr. JENNER. I am a little bit confused. He came by the next day, that
is the day after Mrs. Hall and Marina were there?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And he came by to pick up his birthday gifts?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. At that occasion you didn't say anything to him about the
baptism?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Therefore, at some subsequent occasion----

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. After that----

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. There was a discussion?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I think it was probably the day after that that he
dropped by and he asked me about this. He asked me if they had been
there, and I said yes. He says, "Why didn't you tell me?"

Mr. JENNER. Why you didn't tell him what?

Mrs. GIBSON. That they had been there and that the baby had been
baptized, and I said that it was none of my business.

Mr. JENNER. The thing that confuses me a little bit is he came by and
picked up the birthday gift.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Nothing was said about baptism.

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. On that occasion.

Mrs. GIBSON. No, no; I think he----

Mr. JENNER. Therefore, he must have known or inquired as to where you
got the birthday gift, correct?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't recall. I think I had some story fixed up for
that. Mrs. Hall, I think, told me to tell him that she had been by, or
something. I can't remember what it was, but she had some story, you
know, for how come I had that.

Mr. JENNER. That would explain that, then.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I don't, you know, really remember what was said
exactly.

Mr. JENNER. The day following that occasion----

Mrs. GIBSON. I did not tell him that I had seen Marina, though.

Mr. JENNER. Is when he approached you on the subject?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Of the baptism and why you hadn't told him?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What did you say to him?

Mrs. GIBSON. I told him it was none of my business, and he wasn't too
happy about it.

Mr. JENNER. What did he say about the fact that June had been baptized?

Mrs. GIBSON. Not too much. He wasn't really that upset about it. He
just said he didn't like the idea, but that was all. He wasn't terribly
upset about it.

Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Gibson, was he upset because the baby had been
baptized in the Russian Orthodox Church rather than the Lutheran
Church, for example?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; he was an atheist. He just didn't want anything to do
with religion.

Mr. JENNER. Did you and your husband have discussions with him on the
subject of religion?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And what were his views on the subject of religion?

Mrs. GIBSON. He didn't believe in it. He didn't believe in God. He
didn't believe in anything.

Mr. JENNER. And did that discussion occur reasonably often, on more
than one occasion?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, it was mentioned in with politics. You know how that
can get. The two subjects you are not supposed to talk about we talked
about probably the most.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression about any view or hope or desire
or ambition on his part of some future attainment?

Mrs. GIBSON. He didn't really talk too much about in the future or what
he wanted to do. I don't know what he wanted to do with himself.

Mr. JENNER. Was President Kennedy ever mentioned in the course of the
discussions between your husband and Lee?

Mrs. GIBSON. Never, never. He wasn't President at the time anyway, was
he?

Mr. JENNER. Yes; he was.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he was. He had just become President, hadn't he? No,
he was never mentioned. Now, the only person ever mentioned pertaining
to that was the Governor of Texas.

Mr. JENNER. He became President in 1960.

Mrs. GIBSON. It was the Governor of Texas who was mentioned mostly.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that.

Mrs. GIBSON. First you are going to have to tell me who the Governor
was.

Mr. JENNER. Connally.

Mrs. GIBSON. Connally. Wasn't that the one that----

Mr. JENNER. That had been Secretary of the Navy.

Mrs. GIBSON. That had been Secretary of the Navy, was it? Well, for
some reason Lee just didn't like him. I don't know why, but he didn't
like him.

Mr. JENNER. Would this refresh your recollection, that the subject
of Governor Connally arose in connection with something about Lee's
discharge from the Marines?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't recall. I just know Lee never spoke too much about
why he left the Marines or anything like that. I don't know. Maybe it
was a dishonorable discharge, I don't know. All I know is that it was
something he didn't talk about. And there was a reason why he did not
like Connally.

Mr. JENNER. Whatever the reason was, he didn't articulate the reason
particularly?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; he just didn't like him.

Mr. JENNER. But you have the definite impression he had an aversion to
Governor Connally?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; but he never ever said a word about Kennedy.

Mr. JENNER. Did you answer?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I did; yes.

Mr. JENNER. Your answer is yes?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That he did have a definite aversion?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. To Governor Connally as a person?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And did he speak of that reasonably frequently in these
discussions?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; not really, no. He didn't bring it up frequently.

Mr. JENNER. But he was definite and affirmative about it, was he?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he didn't like him.

Mr. JENNER. Was General Walker ever discussed?

Mrs. GIBSON. No, no.

Mr. JENNER. Were there any discussions in these political arguments
between your husband Gary and Lee Oswald about, oh, the American Civil
Liberties Union, the Birch Society, people having, let's say, extreme
right viewpoints or left viewpoints?

Mrs. GIBSON. Gary was quite a Democrat, and he disliked the Birch
Society intensely. So every once in a while they would come into the
conversation, being that Gary felt so personal about them. He didn't
like them at all. And Gary once in a while would make a comment, "Oh,
he is a Bircher," I can't name any particular person, but just somebody
in particular.

I think Dallas is a fairly Republican city. No, there was nothing ever
about any of the different factions, or right or left wing. Just I know
Gary disliked the Birchers. As I recall, I don't think Lee had much
to say about them. I think maybe he liked more radical people than we
did, you know, the normal straight down the middle or conservative or
something.

Mr. JENNER. Were there occasions when you saw either of the Oswalds at
your father's home?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Were there occasions when your father and your stepmother
brought either of the Oswalds to your apartment other than those you
have already testified about?

Mrs. GIBSON. Not that I recall, no.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall seeing Oswald on the day before he moved into
the YMCA? He moved into the YMCA on Monday, October 15. Did you see him
the previous day, Sunday?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know. I really don't know.

Mr. JENNER. But you do recall taking him to the YMCA?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mrs. JENNER. On Monday, the 15th?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; we might have. I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. Did you go and pick up Oswald at Mrs. Hall's when you took
him to the YMCA, or did he just come by your apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. I can't remember where we picked him up, but I know we
didn't go to Fort Worth to pick him up, no. It could have been at the
bus station.

Mr. JENNER. But you went somewhere to pick him up is your recollection?

Mrs. GIBSON. We could have gone somewhere. He could have come to our
apartment. I don't recall.

Mr. JENNER. You were aware of Marina staying with the Halls?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Hall?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Were you aware of her going to attend to Mrs. Hall; to do
that before she actually went to live with Mrs. Hall?

Mrs. GIBSON. I might have heard something about it from my father. I
don't know.

Mr. JENNER. But you did not hear it from Mrs. Hall?

Mrs. GIBSON. I didn't know Mrs. Hall until I met her through Marina.

Mr. JENNER. After Marina----

Mrs. GIBSON. When I went to visit there.

Mr. JENNER. That is when you went to visit Marina while she was staying
at the Hall's?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; when Lee and Gary and I went over there. That is the
first time I ever met her. But she was very friendly because she knew
my father, you know, and so it was a very friendly atmosphere.

Did Mrs. Hall give a fixed time of when Marina stayed with her?

Mr. JENNER. I can't say it was a fixed time, but she testified that it
was before she had her automobile accident.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, what I am trying to fix in my mind is when Marina
stayed with me, you know.

Mr. JENNER. That is the 3 or 4 days?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I can't fix that in my mind at all now. I thought it
was when he was at the YMCA and then it couldn't have been because of
when the baby was baptized and when his birthday was. But it must have
been shortly before that, because it wasn't after that. So it must have
been before.

Mr. JENNER. Well, it wasn't on the 14th of October because you took him
to the YMCA on the 15th. Was Marina living with you then?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; not then, no. But she might have been shortly before
that. I believe she was at Mrs. Hall's then, wasn't she. Doesn't she
know where she was?

Mr. JENNER. Well, she has got some impressions; yes.

Mrs. GIBSON. I hope she does.

Mr. JENNER. I am trying to find out what you recall.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, you know, I can't recall when she was there. I know
when she wasn't there now more than I did before, from placing his
birthday and the box and that, I know she wasn't there then.

Mr. JENNER. Wasn't where?

Mrs. GIBSON. At my place. I know she wasn't there then, because she
came to visit me from Fort Worth with Mrs. Hall. But how long she had
been with Mrs. Hall must not have been too long.

Mr. JENNER. The thing that bothers me, also, Mrs. Gibson, Mrs. Hall
entered the hospital on the 18th of October.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That is Lee's birthday. She was at your place the preceding
day?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think it was that night that she got in the accident.
That is why I said it was very shocking when I heard, you know, that
she had been in an accident.

Mr. JENNER. And at the time she had her accident, Marina was living
with the Halls'?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Was living at Mrs. Hall's home?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Your husband Gary recalls that while Lee was at the YMCA,
that he came to visit at your home.

Mrs. GIBSON. That is possible.

Mr. JENNER. And his recollection was that Marina was with you at that
time.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, she couldn't have been.

Mr. JENNER. All right. Could it be that she stayed with you for a few
days after he left the YMCA and before they moved into the Elsbeth
Street home or apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, I don't know how it could be possible, because when
we moved her from Fort Worth, she was at Mrs. Hall's. Now whether she
stayed with me while Mrs. Hall was in New York, she couldn't have
because she was, Mrs. Hall was in New York when we moved Marina, see,
and Marina was there.

Now, I suppose it is possible that she stayed with us, then, but I
remember she stayed with Mrs. Hall after the accident because Mrs. Hall
needed her. She couldn't get around. I know she was there before the
accident because of the baptism and Lee's birthday. So it leads me to
believe she was there the whole time, you know.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall when the Oswalds left the Mercedes Street
apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't know when they left that. They moved, from
there they moved all her stuff to Mrs. Hall's.

Mr. JENNER. Right from the Mercedes apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. I guess they must have. All the stuff was there.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall an occasion when your father moved Marina and
the baby from the Elsbeth Street apartment to Mrs. Meller's?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall the Oswalds living at 214 Neely Street?

Mrs. GIBSON. Where was that?

Mr. JENNER. That is just about a block from the Elsbeth Street
apartment, which they moved into from the Elsbeth Street apartment.

Mrs. GIBSON. That must have been after I left.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; it was.

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. You just don't recall anything about that?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I wasn't there.

Mr. JENNER. Now, you do recall Marina staying 3 or 4 days.

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Can you grasp in your recollection why? What led up to that?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think it was the period before she went to Mrs. Hall's.
It must have been after Lee lost his job, or quit.

Mr. JENNER. In Fort Worth?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; and before he got the new one. It must have been
then. And I think it was while they were trying to find her a place to
live, while he was job hunting.

Mr. JENNER. And before he got his job with Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall?

Mrs. GIBSON. It must have been.

Mr. JENNER. On the 12th of October? You see that is a 4-day period,
Mrs. Gibson.

Mrs. GIBSON. Between when he lost his job and got his job?

Mr. JENNER. That is right.

Mrs. GIBSON. That is probably where she stayed then. I am not sure.

Mr. JENNER. The last day he worked at Leslie Welding was the
8th of October 1962. He became employed and went to work for
Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall on the 12th of October 1962.

Mrs. GIBSON. That probably was when she stayed with us, then. I just
don't have any recollection of when it was.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection that she came to stay with
you, the reason why? Was she having difficulty with Oswald? Was that
the reason, or was it because he was out of work?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think it was because he was out of work. I don't think
they had any money. I think my father lent them money, didn't he? I
don't know. Somebody must have given them money. It was Bouhe, that is
who it was who lent them money.

Mr. JENNER. It was only 4 days, Mrs. Gibson.

Mrs. GIBSON. No; but he had to have money to get started. He had to
have money to stay at the YMCA. He had to have money to get started,
and I know who gave him money. George Bouhe did.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; George Bouhe did, there is no question about that.

Mrs. GIBSON. Because I recall that. He gave him money, and he also had
the debt to pay to the American Embassy.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any recollection as to where Oswald stayed
prior to the time that he went to the YMCA on the 15th of October, that
is between the 8th of October and the 15th of October? That is a week.

Mrs. GIBSON. No; all I know is he never did stay at our place overnight
ever.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall when you were looking for this address, was
it an address on North Beckley?

Mrs. GIBSON. It is possible that it was.

Mr. JENNER. Does that stimulate your recollection at all?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; it doesn't. I just know that Beckley is near the river.

Mr. JENNER. And you were looking in the area.

Mrs. GIBSON. Near the river; yes.

Mr. JENNER. Now, between the 19th of October and the 3d of November,
which was the day you picked up Oswald and Marina and the baby and took
them to the Elsbeth Street apartment, do you know where Oswald was
staying?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; but it was probably in that area where I was looking,
you know. I am not even sure who I was looking for, but it seems
possible. I don't know anybody else in Oak Cliff, you know. If that
is anywhere near the Jaggars Co., and I think it is, that is probably
where, and who we were looking for.

Mr. JENNER. Was Marina taken to the dentist to your knowledge other
than the first period, the first visit in August of 1962?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think she might have had another appointment. That
possibly could have been the other reason why she stayed with me, but I
am not positive. It seems to me you know by the dentist records if she
had. I remember she had teeth pulled. Now, how many--and, as I recall,
those first appointments led to a later appointment after her mouth had
healed. But I am not sure.

Mr. JENNER. Did Marina stay at the Halls' on more than one occasion,
that is periods?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't believe so.

Mr. JENNER. Was it just one period?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think it was one period.

Mr. JENNER. Did it have anything to do with Mrs. Hall's accident?

Mrs. GIBSON. Why Marina stayed there, you mean, or why she left?

Mr. JENNER. Why she went there in the first instance.

Mrs. GIBSON. No; Mrs. Hall had not had her accident when Marina first
moved in.

Mr. JENNER. Was Mrs. Hall aware that Marina had stayed at your home?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think so. In fact, I could almost say positively she
must have been aware of it.

Mr. JENNER. What leads you to say that?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, I mean she never knew that Marina and I knew each
other. She brought her to my place. I had told her that, I believe I
myself, told her that Marina had stayed with me. I mean it is just in
common conversation that she must have known. Didn't she know?

Mr. JENNER. Including this 3- or 4-day period?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; she must have known because that was before Marina
stayed with her. Does she know?

Mr. JENNER. She didn't mention it in her testimony.

Mrs. GIBSON. Am I the last one to testify?

Mr. JENNER. No. Mrs. Gibson, were you aware that Lee Oswald gave your
apartment address and your telephone number--when I say your I mean you
and your husband--when he was seeking employment in Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he asked Gary's permission and Gary said all right.

Mr. JENNER. That was in your presence?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Was that permission requested before he went to the YMCA on
the 15th of October? He obtained his job at Jaggars, remember, on the
12th of October.

Mrs. GIBSON. I believe it was before. He said he needed to establish a
residence, and a place where people could get in touch with him, where
if there were any jobs coming up that they could get in touch with him
and call him and he would check with us and we would tell him if there
had been any calls for him or messages during the day.

Mr. JENNER. Now, were there any calls or messages?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; not that I recall. I don't believe there were.

Mr. JENNER. And do you recall him looking for work during this period?
That would be the 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th of October.

Mrs. GIBSON. I really don't know. If he had a job, it doesn't seem that
he would be looking for a job.

Mr. JENNER. He was at the Texas Employment Commission on the 9th, 10th,
and 11th.

Mrs. GIBSON. Then probably he was. And if he gave our address and our
phone number; I am sure he was.

Mr. JENNER. But you don't recall where he was staying during that
period?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. The 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Could he have been staying at Hall's?

Mrs. GIBSON. Gee, it is possible, but I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. But you do recall that he did stay at the Hall's a good
deal or portions of the time that Marina was there?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he went there weekends, as I recall, when he was
working. He spent the weekends there.

Mr. JENNER. When he was working at Jaggars?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. So when he began to work at Jaggars, which was the 12th
of October, up to the 3d of November when you and your husband, Mr.
Taylor, took the Oswalds to the Elsbeth Street apartment, he visited at
the Hall's on weekends?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. So there was some place he was staying then himself during
that period?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; there must have been.

Mr. JENNER. Did Mrs. Hall live in Fort Worth?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And Fort Worth is approximately 30 miles?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. From Dallas, isn't it?

Mrs. GIBSON. He didn't stay in Fort Worth.

Mr. JENNER. He stayed in Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. But you can't recall still where he stayed in Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I have no idea.

Mr. JENNER. But it is now your definite recollection that he did stay
in Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, I know that----

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me--after he became employed at Jaggars?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I will tell you why. Because he told us that he goes
by bus Friday night or something to Fort Worth and he'd come back
Sunday evening. So it would be my normal assumption, I would say, that
he was staying in Dallas at the time.

Mr. JENNER. Had you and your father had some difficulty, some spats
between the two of you along about this time?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; we had been spatting all our life.

Mr. JENNER. I mean were you on speaking terms?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I'd say so.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall at least one occasion when you picked up
Oswald in front of the YMCA?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't.

Mr. JENNER. That your husband Gary would go over and pick him up?

Mrs. GIBSON. I guess so.

Mr. JENNER. Bring him to your apartment?

Mrs. GIBSON. I guess so, or he'd walk. I don't know. I don't believe
Gary picked him up there. I believe he walked or took the bus.

Mr. JENNER. What do you recall with respect to Lee's habits of
temperance or intemperance, drinking?

Mrs. GIBSON. I never saw him take a drink.

Mr. JENNER. Did he smoke?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't think he did.

Mr. JENNER. Did Marina smoke?

Mrs. GIBSON. On the sly.

Mr. JENNER. Why?

Mrs. GIBSON. Because he objected to smoking, as I recall. He did. He
didn't like to see her smoke, and he didn't like to see her wear any
makeup.

Mr. JENNER. Did any discussions respecting that occur at your home?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; she told me this. Don't ask me how. We just got it
across to each other, you know.

Mr. JENNER. How did she communicate with you?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, when two people get together, if you try hard enough
you will get your idea across. If you have a dictionary and two hands,
you will get the idea across, and that is how we managed to, you know,
get our ideas fairly well across most of the time. But we didn't make
too great an attempt at speaking because it was so much effort. But I
do know this about makeup and smoking.

Mr. JENNER. Were there arguments between them on the subject?

Mrs. GIBSON. Oh, I'd say maybe small ones. He didn't like her to wear
lipstick and she liked to, things like that. She did like to smoke.

Mr. JENNER. What about his reading habits?

Mrs. GIBSON. He read a lot.

Mr. JENNER. How do you know that?

Mrs. GIBSON. My father had given him books to read. He was very much
interested in them.

Mr. JENNER. Did he have them with him at times when he was at your
place?

Mrs. GIBSON. One book I think he gave me that my father had asked him
to give me or I gave him that my father had asked him to give me, one
way or the other, it was called "Animal Farm."

Mr. JENNER. What is that book about?

Mrs. GIBSON. It is a satire, I guess. It is about animals, but it is a
takeoff on people. Orwell--did he write it?

Mr. JENNER. I think so. What is your recollection as to whether you
gave Oswald that book to read or whether your father gave it to him to
read?

Mrs. GIBSON. One way or the other it got to me. Either my father gave
it to me to read and I gave it to Lee or he gave it to Lee to read and
then Lee gave it to me. It was one way or the other.

Mr. JENNER. Do you remember any other books?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think my father gave him some literature. I don't know
what it was, though. Oh, "1984" was another book that he read.

Mr. JENNER. Did he indicate that he had read it before?

Mrs. GIBSON. I believe that he had. That was by Orwell, too, wasn't it?

Mr. JENNER. Yes; it was. Did he indicate that he had read "1984" when
he was a Marine at El Toro, Calif.?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I think he read it again. My father had it and my
father read it, and I think Lee said he wanted to read it again.

Mr. JENNER. Did he ever discuss that book in your presence?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. What else do you recall as to the titles of books he read?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think he read the "Rise and the Fall of the Third
Reich." He read Hitler's, what would it be, autobiography?

Mr. JENNER. "Mein Kampf"?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; he read the Marx book--what was that, was that the
Rise and Fall of the Third Reich? No; what was it, about Marxism?

Mr. JENNER. "Das Kapital"?

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know what it was, but anyway, he read a book
that Marx wrote on Marxism, and that is about all I can recall on his
literature.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall some people or a person whose first name was
Natasha or Evalina?

Mrs. GIBSON. I know Natasha.

Mr. JENNER. How did Natasha come into this?

Mrs. GIBSON. First you will have to give me her last name so I am sure
I have got the right one.

Mr. JENNER. I can't give it to you.

Mrs. GIBSON. You don't have it?

Mr. JENNER. I can't because I don't know.

Mrs. GIBSON. You can't because you don't have it? Really?

Mr. JENNER. Really.

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, Natasha was a friend of my parents. They got in some
numerous squabbles and sometimes they'd part.

Mr. JENNER. Was she a single lady?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; she has a husband.

Mr. JENNER. They lived in Dallas?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; they are Russian. I can't think of her last name for
the life of me. Now, I don't know if Natasha knew Lee or not. Natasha
was a friend of my father and Jeanne. They got in numerous squabbles.
Their friendship would break off and then they'd come back together
again after a few months after the squabble had quieted down. Now,
whether she knew Lee or not, I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. You mentioned that in one of your interviews, and my query
of you is what led you to mention that, Natasha?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, being that she was one of the Russian colony I
figured probably she would know them. That is all.

Mr. JENNER. You were speculating?

Mrs. GIBSON. Speculating; that is all. Whether she did or not, I have
no idea.

Mr. JENNER. In one of your interviews you stated that after Marina had
stayed with you, she had moved into the Hall's. Does that refresh your
recollection that that 3- or 4-day period was immediately preceding her
moving into the Hall's?

Mrs. GIBSON. No. When all those questions were given to me, I didn't
have much time to think. It was completely by surprise. And when I said
that, I meant the first day, because as you found out, those days that
I am talking about are extremely vague. Why I don't know, but they are
very vague.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether possibly Oswald stayed with his
mother in Fort Worth?

Mrs. GIBSON. Maybe.

Mr. JENNER. In this period, say, from October 19 through November 3?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe he did, because he had to be in
Dallas. He couldn't commute to Dallas every day. Does his mother say
this?

Mr. JENNER. No. Do you have any recollection that Oswald stayed in the
Elsbeth Street apartment before Marina was moved in?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I don't believe he did.

Mr. JENNER. Did any discussion occur as to whether Oswald had renounced
or attempted to renounce his American citizenship?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Was the subject even discussed?

Mrs. GIBSON. Well, it was when he told us about how, you know, the
Russians wanted him to give it up.

Mr. JENNER. And he declined to?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Was Marina politically minded?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; I wouldn't say so.

Mr. JENNER. But she was religious?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I'd say she was.

Mr. JENNER. What was your impression of Oswald as to his intellect?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think he was very intelligent.

Mr. JENNER. Was he articulate?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And what about his argumentation?

Mrs. GIBSON. Very good. He could make almost anybody believe what he
was saying.

Mr. JENNER. He was strong in his convictions?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Unbending?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any impression of whether he was quick-tempered
or prone to violence?

Mrs. GIBSON. I think he was very quick tempered.

Mr. JENNER. He flared up, did he, during these arguments?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And other things, with your husband?

Mrs. GIBSON. No; not with my husband. With his wife. He got disgusted,
I think, with our stupidity, as he called it, which used to infuriate
me. I don't particularly like being called stupid, and he used to call
us stupid a lot.

Mr. JENNER. Was that because you differed in your view?

Mrs. GIBSON. Differed with him.

Mr. JENNER. From him?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; that was his favorite word, we were stupid, we
weren't using our brains. He'd come up with something like, "How could
you possibly say such a thing?"

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever pick him up at the Jaggars place of business?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. Your father and your stepmother now reside in Haiti?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. When did they go to Haiti?

Mrs. GIBSON. Last year some time.

Mr. JENNER. June of 1963.

Mrs. GIBSON. I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. Have you seen your father or your stepmother since then?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I saw them a couple of weeks ago.

Mr. JENNER. When they were here to testify, they dropped by to see you,
did they?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Your husband Donald Gibson is a native-born American?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. In an interview on December 3, 1963, you are reported
to have said that Lee Oswald occasionally came to your apartment,
of yourself and your husband, and although Marina stayed at your
apartment, only about 2 weeks, Oswald continued to visit on occasions.
Does that refresh your recollection that this stay of Marina at your
home was longer than 3 to 4 days?

Mrs. GIBSON. It must have been misunderstood. If I had said 2 weeks
I must have meant in all, meaning putting all your days together,
because I never would have said 2 weeks meaning a solid period of time
of 2 weeks.

Mr. JENNER. I think that is about all. I neglected to do this, Mrs.
Gibson. You received a letter from Mr. Rankin, did you not?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes; I did.

Mr. JENNER. General counsel for the Commission, with which he enclosed
a copy of the legislation, Senate Joint Resolution 137, authorizing the
creation of this Commission?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. A copy of President Johnson's Executive Order No. 11130
which created the Commission?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And fixed its scope and its powers and its duties and
responsibilities, which in general are to investigate the circumstances
surrounding leading up to, and involving the assassination of President
John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And, also, a copy of the rules and regulations of the
Commission under which depositions are taken?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And you understand from all those papers that the
Commission is interviewing people who had, fortunately, or
unfortunately, touched the life of Lee Harvey Oswald and others?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And we had understood and as has now been revealed you did
have a connection with or some connection with the Oswalds?

Mrs. GIBSON. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Which you have now elucidated.

I am Albert E. Jenner, Jr., one of the members of the legal staff of
the Commission, and Mr. Mosk, who was present earlier, likewise is a
member. Now, having in mind the objects and purposes and duties of
the Commission, is there anything that occurs to you that you would
like to add that you think would be helpful to the Commission in its
investigation of this subject?

Mrs. GIBSON. No.

Mr. JENNER. All right, that is all I have, and I appreciate very much
your coming here today. I know it is a considerable inconvenience.



AFFIDAVIT OF RUTH HYDE PAINE

The following affidavit was executed by Ruth Hyde Paine on June 24,
1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Dallas, ss_:

Ruth Hyde Paine, being affirmed, says:

1. I reside at 2515 West 5th Street, Irving, Texas. I am the Ruth Hyde
Paine who testified before the Commission on March 18, 19 and 20, 1964,
and gave testimony by deposition in Washington, D.C. at the offices of
the Commission on Saturday, March 21, 1964, and gave further testimony
by deposition in my home the evening of Monday, March 23, 1964.

2. On the occasion of Saturday, November 9, 1963, about which I
testified before the Commission, when I took Marina and Lee Oswald in
my station wagon to the Texas Automobile Drivers Bureau Station in
the Oak Cliff section of Dallas, Texas, to enable Lee Oswald to make
application for an automobile driver's learner's permit, each of my two
children and both of the Oswald children, June and Rachel, accompanied
us.

3. Upon our arrival at the Automobile Drivers License Bureau, which
was located in a shopping center area in Oak Cliff, we discovered
that the Automobile Drivers License Bureau was closed. All of us went
down the street to a ten cent store which was located approximately
three doors down the street from the Automobile Drivers License Bureau
Station. We entered the store. I purchased some child panties for my
children and Marina selected and Lee paid for an infant's pacifier.

4. After we made the purchases, all of us returned to my station wagon,
entered it, and I drove directly to my home in Irving, Texas. Upon
arrival there, all of us entered my home where we remained throughout
the balance of that day and evening. Marina and Lee Oswald and their
children were present in my home throughout the two following days and
evenings, November 10 and 11, 1963. Lee Oswald returned to his work at
the Texas School Book Depository Tuesday morning, November 12, 1963. I
was present in my home throughout November 10 and 11, 1963, except as
described in paragraph 13.

5. During the course of my testimony by deposition in Washington, D.C.
on Saturday, March 21, 1964, Mr. Jenner examined me with respect to the
various entries in my calendar diary, Commission Exhibit No. 401, for
the period commencing and following September 24, 1963, including, in
particular, those entries respecting baby and child clinic appointments
for June Oswald and Rachel Oswald, in clinics in Irving, Texas, and
in Dallas, Texas, as well as other appointments for June Oswald. On
all occasions following Marina's return to my home from Parkland
Hospital on October 22, 1963, following the birth of her daughter
Rachel on October 20, 1963, when baby clinic, dental and other medical
and physical attention appointments for either of Marina's children
were made, and about which I have heretofore testified, I drove to
the clinic or doctor's office in my station wagon accompanied by each
of my children and by Marina and both of her children. This was so
irrespective of which of Marina's children was to receive medical or
other attention.

6. There were a number of occasions subsequent to September 24, 1963,
on which Marina and both of her children accompanied me when I drove in
my station wagon to shops, grocery stores, etc., in and about Irving,
Texas, to do limited shopping or purchase food stuffs. On each of these
occasions, we were also accompanied by my children. Understandably,
Marina desired "to get out of the house" and visit with me around
Irving, Texas, when convenient to me. I understood this and often went
out of my way to invite her to come with me. She always brought her
daughter June and after the birth of her daughter Rachel, also brought
her.

7. On none of the above occasions did we shop in or visit or enter
any furniture store. This includes the Furniture Mart, a store that
was located at 149 East Irving Boulevard, Irving, Texas, which I now
understand was owned and operated during its existence by one Edith
Whitworth.

8. There were only two occasions during all the period in the Fall of
1963 that I took Marina and Lee together in my station wagon to Dallas,
Texas, or anywhere in Irving, Texas. One occasion was a trip to Dallas,
Texas, the morning of November 9, 1963, which I have mentioned above.
(The other is described in paragraph 14.) I do not know Mrs. Whitworth.
I never visited her place of business, nor did I ever drive Lee Oswald
or Marina to that place of business; and, to the best of my knowledge
and recollection, Marina was never at or in that place of business with
or without Lee Oswald during the period she resided in my home in the
Fall of 1963.

9. At no time after Marina and I and our children arrived in Irving,
Texas, on September 24, 1963, from New Orleans, Louisiana, did I ever
take Lee Oswald or Marina Oswald to the Irving Sports Shop, which is
located at 221 East Irving Boulevard, Irving, Texas. I was quite aware
during all of this period of Marina's activities and where she was. I
know of no occasion when either she or Lee Oswald visited either the
Furniture Mart or the Irving Sports Shop.

10. There was no occasion during the period Marina resided with me in
the Fall of 1963, of which I was aware or now recollect, that Marina
rode either in my station wagon or any other automobile or means of
conveyance with Lee Oswald at the wheel. Neither the Irving Sports Shop
nor Mrs. Whitworth nor Dyal Ryder was ever mentioned in my presence by
either of the Oswalds.

11. I never drove Lee Oswald, with or without Marina, to any area or
place in or about either Dallas, Fort Worth, or Irving, Texas, to
enable Lee Oswald to engage in rifle practice. I did not know until the
afternoon of November 22, 1963, that he possessed or owned a firearm
of any kind or character. At no time prior to November 25, 1963, did I
know or had I heard of anybody by the name of Dyal Ryder.

12. Lee Oswald was not in my home and to the best of my knowledge
was not in Irving, Texas, at any time on November 6 or 7, 1963. My
recollection is clear that on each of those days, as well as November
8, 1963, Marina and her two children, June and Rachel, were present
in my home day and night. Lee Oswald arrived at my home from Dallas,
Texas, between 5:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. on November 8, 1963, for his
customary week-end visit, which as to this particular week-end was to
extend over through Armistice Day, November 11, 1963. Except for the
trip to Dallas, Texas, on November 9, 1963, which I have described
above, Lee Oswald remained in my home from the time of his arrival,
the late afternoon of November 8, 1963, until he departed for Dallas,
Texas, in the early morning of November 12, 1963.

13. I was not present in my home for part of the day on November 11,
1963. As I testified, I made a trip that day, which was Armistice
Day and a holiday, to Dallas, Texas. I was gone from approximately
9:00 A.M. to 2:00 P.M. Not wishing to burden Lee and Marina with my
children, I had them stay at my neighbors the Craigs. Marina and Lee
Oswald and their children were in my home when I left and were there
when I returned. Based upon my conversation with Marina and Lee Oswald,
and my understanding of their plans for the day, it is my clear opinion
that all of them remained in my home during my trip to and from Dallas.

14. There was one occasion in addition to the occasion of Nov. 9, 1963,
which I have described above, that I drove Marina and Lee in my station
wagon to Dallas, Texas. On Monday, October 14, which was the day before
Lee Oswald obtained a position at the Texas School Book Depository,
I drove him to Dallas, Texas. We were accompanied by Marina and her
child June as well as by my children. I testified about this event. We
left Lee Oswald off in Dallas at Ross Avenue near LaMarr. I then took
my typewriter to a shop in Dallas for repair and Marina and I and our
children returned to Irving, Texas.

Signed this 24th day of June 1964.

    (S) Ruth Hyde Paine,
        RUTH HYDE PAINE.



AFFIDAVIT OF M. WALDO GEORGE

The following affidavit was executed by M. Waldo George on June 12,
1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Dallas, ss_:

M. Waldo George, 6769 Inverness Street, Dallas, being duly sworn says:

1. I am the office manager of Tucker Manning Insurance Company. I
am the owner of the premises at 214 Neeley Street, Dallas, Texas,
consisting of two apartments, one upper and one lower. In the latter
part of January 1963 the upper apartment became vacant and I posted it
"For Rent" by means of an appropriate sign in the yard in front of the
premises.

2. On March 2, 1963, I was advised by Mrs. George that an individual by
the name of "Oswald" had inquired about renting the apartment. Later
that day I met the individual who identified himself as Lee H. Oswald.
I advised him that the rent for the apartment was $60 per month, and he
rented the apartment on a month-to-month basis, paying me $60 in cash
for one month's rent in advance.

3. On April 1, 1963, I collected $60 in cash from Oswald, covering rent
for the month of April 1963 to and including May 2, 1963.

4. Shortly after this occasion the downstairs tenants, Mr. and Mrs.
George B. Gray, called me and informed me that the man in the upstairs
apartment was beating his wife. I made no inquiry into this subject
matter.

5. Two or three days later, myself and Mrs. George called on the
Oswalds in their apartment and invited them to attend Gaston Avenue
Baptist Church with us. He informed me and Mrs. George that he attended
the Russian Orthodox Church although they were not regular in their
attendance, because they had to depend on their friends to take them.

6. During this visit Oswald stated that he had met his wife while he
was serving in the United States Marines as a guard at the United
States Embassy in Russia, and had married his wife in Russia. I made
direct inquiry of him as to whether he had had any difficulty in
getting out of Russia with his wife and he said that he had had no
difficulty whatsoever.

7. Neither myself or Mrs. George saw Oswald again at any time
thereafter. Oswald did not pay rent for the succeeding rental period
of May 2 through June 2, 1963. Because my attention was diverted by
other matters, I did not go by the apartment to collect the rent for
that period until several days after May 2, 1963. When I arrived at the
apartment I found it vacant.

Signed this 12th day of June 1964 at Dallas Texas.

    (S) M. Waldo George,
        M. WALDO GEORGE.



TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM KIRK STUCKEY

The testimony of William Kirk Stuckey was taken at 9:35 a.m., on June
6, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Mr. Albert E.
Jenner, Jr., assistant counsel of the President's Commission.


Mr. JENNER. Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, in your deposition which you are about to
give?

Mr. STUCKEY. I do.

Mr. JENNER. Be seated. State your full name?

Mr. STUCKEY. William Kirk Stuckey.

Mr. JENNER. I regret, Mr. Stuckey, that we have to inconvenience you
to have you back to have your deposition taken again. But through some
happenstance in New Orleans, the transcript of your deposition never
went beyond the U.S. attorney's office apparently, and we appreciate
your willingness to come up here and be with us today so that I can
depose you again. When I took your deposition before you had received a
letter from Mr. Rankin, had you not?

Mr. STUCKEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. I guess I called you when I was down there, didn't I?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; that is correct.

Mr. JENNER. And I explained to you at that time, the time before when
I took your deposition, however, the legislation under which the
Commission was authorized and the Executive order of the President
creating the Commission and the rules and regulations of the Commission
on the taking of depositions?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I understand that.

Mr. JENNER. Thank you. In effect, we want to inquire of you in
particular with respect to the course of events in which you
interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald while he was in New Orleans in 1963 at
some radio broadcasts which you, in your professional capacity, that
is, your professional business, had organized, had put on, and you had
some fairly extended acquaintance with Oswald in a professional sense.

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes. Would you like me to tell you from the very first?

Mr. JENNER. Well, I think for the very first, for the purpose of the
record, identify yourself, who you were then and who you are now, and
your profession and business and associations.

Mr. STUCKEY. Fine. At present I am employed at Tulane University as
a special writer. In this capacity I write a syndicated column on
higher education which Tulane distributes to 85 newspapers throughout
the country. In August 1963 I was a broadcaster with WDSU Radio, New
Orleans. This is the NBC station. I had a weekly 5-minute radio
program on economic and political developments in Latin America. I had
been in this particular specialty for about 2 years previous. Prior to
that I was a columnist with New Orleans States Item, with an interest
in Latin America. As a result I had been looking for a long time for
representatives of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in that area.

Mr. JENNER. If you would excuse me a second, would you give me your
formal education because, as I recall in taking your deposition in New
Orleans, you acquired some interest in South American relations which
led you into looking for something on this Fair Play for Cuba Committee.

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes. Formal education was a B.S. degree in journalism
from Southern Methodist University in Dallas. After graduation I went
into the Marine Corps and completed 2 years of service, after which I
spent some 8 months in Central America and Mexico traveling around,
essentially hitchhiking, some walking, some third-class bus riding,
in which I acquired a good deal of Spanish and an interest in the
countries.

Mr. JENNER. What is a third-class bus?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is where the goats and chickens aren't on top; they
are in there with you.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. STUCKEY. After I returned I went into the newspaper business.

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, how old are you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Thirty-two.

Mr. JENNER. You are married?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; and----

Mr. JENNER. Do you have a family and you live in New Orleans?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What is your address?

Mr. STUCKEY. 2317 State Street, and I have two children. I went into
the newspaper business after returning from Latin America, working
largely as a political reporter for a number of years.

Mr. JENNER. Were you giving attention to any particular phase of
politics?

Mr. STUCKEY. Local government?

Mr. JENNER. Thinking of it in the higher sense--local government.

Mr. STUCKEY. You mean in a higher sense, in a subject category?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. I was interested particularly in planning and zoning.

Mr. JENNER. Did you acquire also an interest in South American
relations?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; well, I had this interest, but I had no opportunity
to exercise this interest in my work until the New Orleans States
Item made me a columnist. This was in February 1962 when I started my
column, and this extended on until April, I believe it was, 1963.

Mr. JENNER. What was the title of that column?

Mr. STUCKEY. New Orleans and the Americas. That was really my first
professional involvement in Latin American affairs. After I left the
paper, doing public relations, I acquired this radio program, this
radio broadcast, which was a very short thing. It was largely to keep
my name in front of the public in this capacity. And----

Mr. JENNER. That was a broadcast program?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. It was put on regularly, was it?

Mr. STUCKEY. Once a week.

Mr. JENNER. And it is the NBC station down there?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Radio and television or just radio?

Mr. STUCKEY. Radio.

Mr. JENNER. That program had a title?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; Latin Listening Post.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us in general the character of that program and to
what you were directing your attention.

Mr. STUCKEY. Politics and economics. I inquired a bit about the Cuban
situation. I had a number of programs that I think you would classify
as news features. They didn't particularly have current events value,
but they were interesting topics, and I just went and talked about
them. I talked about social welfare programs in Uruguay, the Mexican
Revolution; Central American common market; the character of the Latin
American university student, this sort of thing.

Occasionally, when I had a live one, when I heard there was somebody
in town who was a Latin bigwig, I would bring him on and we would talk
whatever he wanted to talk about.

Mr. JENNER. How did you organize those programs?

Mr. STUCKEY. Well----

Mr. JENNER. Did you have any preliminary discussions with the people
you were going to have on your programs?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes, yes; sometimes I took up to 3 to 4 days to prepare a
5-minute broadcast.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. Actually it is 5 minutes which demands about 700 words,
which was just about as long or longer than the column that I used to
write, so these columns, 700 words, which would run about a column and
a half of type in the paper, consumed within a 5-minute period on the
broadcast. Anything else along that line?

Mr. JENNER. I think that covers it generally. Tell us the nature of
your work with Tulane University.

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. You became associated with Tulane when?

Mr. STUCKEY. In January, January 6.

Mr. JENNER. Of this year?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. What is the nature of that work?

Mr. STUCKEY. I write a syndicated column on higher education. The
column is called Dimension in Education. We deal with all manner of
events and affairs affecting higher education, and sometimes things
that do not affect higher education. I roam the spectrum of interest in
the things. It is extremely interesting.

I sometimes write about such things as the Common Market, the
humanities versus science, all this sort of thing, all the current
controversies we get into.

Mr. JENNER. Is that in the nature of public relations work?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; very soft shell public relations. Sometimes we don't
even mention Tulane. It is just that I think probably Tulane just wants
to be established as a fount of wisdom in this particular field, and
that is why they print these reports.

Mr. JENNER. During the year 1963, did an event occur, a series of
events occur, in which you became acquainted with a man by the name of
Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. In your own words, taking it from the very first instant of
the course of events, perhaps even before you met this man, tell us in
your own words, and it doesn't have to be chronological, but the way
you would put it out, about it.

Mr. STUCKEY. Fine. As I told you before, as a Latin American columnist
and one interested in affairs, I had been looking for some time in New
Orleans for representatives of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. There
haven't been any. Most of the organizations that I had contact with in
my work----

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me--how did you learn about the Fair Play for Cuba
Committee?

Mr. STUCKEY. I was going to get to that.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. STUCKEY. Most of the organizations that I had contact with were
refugee organizations, very violently anti-Castro groups, and there
were a number of them in New Orleans. These people were news sources
for me also. I used them quite frequently. One day, I think it was
in August, the latter part of July of 1963, I was in the bank, and I
ran across a refugee friend of mine by the name of Carlos Bringuier.
Bringuier told me----

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me--identify Mr. Bringuier.

Mr. STUCKEY. Mr. Bringuier at that time was the New Orleans delegate to
the Revolutionary Student Directorate which was an anti-Castro group
with headquarters in Miami. He also ran a clothing store called Casa
Roca. He was an attorney in Havana before the Revolution, the Cuban
Revolution of 1958, and had been very active ever since I had known
him in New Orleans in anti-Castro activity. I had interviewed him on
a number of occasions in connection with Cuban current events. Mr.
Bringuier ran into me in the bank, and I spoke to him and he said that
a representative of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee had appeared in
New Orleans and that he had had an encounter with him shortly before.

Mr. JENNER. That interested you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes, very much, very much, because I knew something of the
reputation of this group. I regarded them as being about the leading
pro-Castro organization in this country, a propaganda organ for the
Castro forces, and I had done a considerable amount of reading of
congressional testimony, articles, and this sort of thing about their
activities. Mr. Bringuier said he had had an encounter with a young man
who was representing the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. Excuse me--you had known Bringuier and you had had contact
with him; had he ever been on your program up to this moment that you
speak of?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; he had never been on my program, but, as a
newspaperman, I had contacted him quite frequently for information.

Mr. JENNER. Proceed.

Mr. STUCKEY. He told me that--this is in the bank--a few days before, I
don't recall exactly----

Mr. JENNER. This was a chance meeting?

Mr. STUCKEY. This was a chance meeting with Mr. Bringuier. I was
cashing my paycheck and Bringuier told me a few days before he had
run into this fellow in his store, this Casa Roca--this young man had
approached him.

Mr. JENNER. A young man had come in?

Mr. STUCKEY. A young man. At the time he had mentioned no name. If he
had, it wouldn't have made any difference to me because the name meant
nothing.

He said a young man came in, introduced himself and said he was a
veteran of the Marine Corps, he had just gotten out, and that he was
very disturbed by this Cuban situation and he wanted to do something
about hurting Castro, or trying to change the regime. He, in some
way----

Mr. JENNER. This was something this up-to-the-moment unnamed young man
had said to Mr. Bringuier?

Mr. STUCKEY. Had said to Mr. Bringuier as Bringuier recounted it to me
later. I am telling you Bringuier's story now.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; I wanted to make clear that you were.

Mr. STUCKEY. Right. Now, this young man said somehow he knew Bringuier
was connected with the Revolutionary Student Directorate, how, I don't
know. But, at any rate, as I said, he offered his services.

Then he presented a Marine Corps Handbook to Bringuier. He said, "This
might help you out in your guerrilla activities and such. This is my
own personal Marine Corps Handbook", which Bringuier accepted. That
was the gist of the conversation. Bringuier told me that sometime
after that, I don't recall exactly how long it was, he was walking
on Canal Street, the main street of New Orleans, about a block away
from his store, and he ran into this young man again. This time he was
distributing literature, handbills, and the handbills said, "Hands
Off Cuba", and on the handbill it said, "Join the Fair Play for Cuba
Committee in New Orleans, Charter Member Branch".

It was this same young man. Bringuier, who was a rather excitable
fellow, and he couldn't understand why this fellow was now distributing
pro-Castro literature whereas a short time before he had posed as an
anti-Castro man. So Bringuier got into a shouting match with him on the
street corner, and I think some blows were exchanged, I am not sure.

Mr. JENNER. Bringuier is again telling you this?

Mr. STUCKEY. This is what Bringuier is telling me, because I did not
witness this. At any rate, regardless of what happened, I don't know
the exact sequence of events, the police arrived on the scene and took
everybody down to the jail. Oswald was booked for disturbing the peace,
and I think later fined $10, and let go. Well, this is what Bringuier
told me in the bank.

Mr. JENNER. I may assume up to this moment you had not seen anything in
the newspapers on this subject?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; I hadn't. There wouldn't have been anything in the
newspaper had it not been in my column, and my column at that time did
not exist.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. STUCKEY. So I mentioned to Bringuier that I was interested in
locating this fellow and talking to him. Bringuier gave me his name.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recall that this was the early part of August?

Mr. STUCKEY. Or the latter part of July, I am not really sure. It
wasn't--I would say probably the early part of August. It was a Friday.
I can tell you that.

Mr. JENNER. It was August 9, 1963.

Mr. STUCKEY. That is quite possible. So I inquired as to the name and
the address of this fellow, and telephone, if any, and Bringuier said
his name was Lee Oswald, and he lived on Magazine Street, somewhere in
the 4000 block, I forget the exact address, and he had no telephone.
This was a Friday. My program is on a Saturday.

I decided that early the next morning I would go by this address
and ask Oswald if he would appear on my program. So very early, it
was about 8 o'clock the following--wait a minute, I am losing some
chronology. This was not the next Saturday. Then some time elapsed,
and, at any rate, it was August 17 when I went by his house. I forget
now exactly why this time did elapse, but it did.

Mr. JENNER. Had he again distributed handbills?

Mr. STUCKEY. To my knowledge; no. He may have. He may have. But, of
course, I had no particular interest in it, and the papers were not
carrying stories about it, and I, well, just had no contact with him at
all.

I did not meet him until August 17, at which time I went by his house
on Magazine Street to ask him to appear on my program. This was early
in the morning, about 8 o'clock. I went early because I wanted to get
him before he left.

Mr. JENNER. This was a Saturday?

Mr. STUCKEY. It is a Saturday. I knocked on the door, and this young
fellow came out, without a shirt. He had a pair of Marine Corps fatigue
trousers on. I asked him, "Are you Lee Oswald?" And he said "Yes."

I introduced myself and I told him I would like to have him on my
program that night. So he asked me in on the porch. This was a screened
porch, and I had a very brief chat. He said he would ask me inside for
some coffee but that his wife and his baby were sleeping so we had
better talk on the porch.

Mr. JENNER. Describe this Magazine Street place. Were you able to find
it easily?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; no problem. It was on the side of the house--or the
entrance was on the side.

Mr. JENNER. Was on the side and somewhat back from the front?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; it was facing the street; it wasn't facing the side
of the property, but it was offset, to the rear.

Mr. JENNER. Frame house?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; it was a frame house, as well as I recall.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. So we had a few cursory remarks there about the
organization. He showed me his membership card to the Fair Play for
Cuba Committee, which was interesting, and it identified him as
the secretary of the New Orleans chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba
Committee, and it was signed by A. Hidell, president.

Mr. JENNER. Was that president or secretary?

Mr. STUCKEY. President, A. Hidell. He was identified on the card, as I
recall, as the secretary.

Mr. JENNER. That is, Oswald?

Mr. STUCKEY. Oswald; yes. It was a card on which there was a
handwritten--it said "Mr." and then a blank, and a handwritten name
"Lee Oswald" was in the center of the card. In the lower right-hand
corner it was signed by A. Hidell, president.

Mr. JENNER. Was this name familiar to you?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; as a matter of fact, I would like to explain this,
that the name meant nothing to me at all, and the name never occurred
to me again, I never thought of the name again, until after the
assassination when Mr. Henry Wade of Dallas on television on a Sunday,
I believe, mentioned that Oswald purchased a rifle from a Chicago
mail-order house and had used the name A. Hidell in purchasing the
rifle. When he said "A. Hidell" it hit me like, it was like a light
bulb over my head, I recalled the name. Otherwise I would never have
remembered the name.

Oswald gave me some pieces of literature at this time. There were
several--I will mention them if you would like.

Mr. JENNER. I wish you would.

Mr. STUCKEY. There were two speeches by Fidel Castro. One was "The
Revolution Must Be a School of Unfettered Thought." Another was
"Bureaucracy and Sectarianism." There was a pamphlet by Jean Paul
Sartre, and this pamphlet was called "Ideology and Revolution."

There was a pamphlet called "The Crime Against Cuba," by Corliss
Lamont. I believe that is all the literature that he gave me at that
time. I got some subsequently to that which, incidentally, Mr. Jenner.
I promised you that pamphlet the last time I saw you, and I couldn't
find it, but I have since found it, and I brought it up for you. I will
give it to you now before I forget.

Mr. JENNER. Yes. I will show you what is marked Garner Exhibit No. 1
and ask you if you recognize the person shown on that photograph.

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; that is Lee Oswald.

Mr. JENNER. Does it look like him as of the time that you interviewed
him on Saturday, August 17?

Mr. STUCKEY. Almost exactly. He was dressed almost in exactly the same
way, with a short-sleeved dress shirt, and a tie, and a black looseleaf
notebook under his arm which apparently he used as a holder for
literature.

Mr. JENNER. I hand you a series of exhibits, Pizzo Exhibits Nos. 453-A,
453-B, and 453-C. Would you examine those and tell me whether your
friend, Mr. Bringuier, is shown on any of those photographs?

Mr. STUCKEY. He is not there.

Mr. JENNER. You were referring to Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-A; he is not on
that one?

Mr. STUCKEY. No. Pizzo Exhibit 453-C is of Oswald alone.

Mr. JENNER. Pizzo Exhibit 453-C is a picture of Oswald?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes. Pizzo Exhibit 453-B is also Oswald, but Bringuier is
not in the picture.

Mr. JENNER. All right. We will mark the pamphlet you have brought with
you, which is entitled "The Cuban 'Episode' and the American Press:
April 9-23, 1961" as Stuckey Exhibit No. 1.

(The pamphlet was marked Stuckey Exhibit No. 1 for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. Handing you Stuckey Exhibit No. 1, being a 15-page
pamphlet--I guess it is 16 including the back cover--is that one of the
pamphlets that he handed to you and exhibited to you on August 17 and
Saturday morning when you interviewed him in his home?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; this is not one. I received this pamphlet that night
when he showed up at the radio station.

Mr. JENNER. We will go into it later on, but I think for purposes of
identification, was it a pamphlet that he gave you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; he gave it to me.

Mr. JENNER. Prior to the radio broadcast you are about to describe?

Mr. STUCKEY. Immediately prior to that. Incidentally, I requested all
the literature that he had.

Mr. JENNER. You did?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; and he gave me everything he could find that morning
which were the four or five pieces I have already described. Then at
night he says, "Look, I found this also", and he brought this.

Mr. JENNER. Meaning Stuckey Exhibit No. 1?

Mr. STUCKEY. Stuckey Exhibit No. 1.

Mr. JENNER. I offer Stuckey Exhibit No. 1 in evidence. All right, we
had you still on Saturday morning talking with him at his home on
Magazine Street.

Mr. STUCKEY. Right. We discussed literature, his literature, the pieces
of information I have already described. He showed me the Fair Play
for Cuba Committee membership card. I asked him about the membership
of this organization, and he said there were quite a few, quite a few
members. The figure 12 or 13 sticks in my head. I don't really recall
why now. There were that many officers or something like that, 12 or
13 people he mentioned that he was responsible to, or active workers,
something like that, although I guess I shouldn't mention it until I
have a more coherent idea of why he used that.

Mr. JENNER. Just give your best recollection of what he said on that
occasion.

Mr. STUCKEY. Right. Also as I recall, he was very vehement, insisting
he was not the president, but was the secretary, and that was the
occasion in which he pulled out his card showing that he was the
secretary, not the president, and this other gentleman, Hidell, was the
president.

Mr. JENNER. Did that strike you in any special way that he was
apparently careful to point out to you that he was secretary instead of
president?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; it made no impression on me, none whatsoever. It
seemed logical. He appeared to be a very logical, intelligent fellow,
and the only strange thing about him was his organization. This was,
seemed, incongruous to me that a group of this type--or he should
associate with a group of this type, because he did not seem the type
at all, or at least what I have in my mind as the type.

I would like to mention this. I was arrested by his cleancutness. I
didn't expect this at all. I expected a folk-singer type, something of
that kind, somebody with a beard and sandals, and he said--I found this
fellow, instead I found this fellow who was neat and clean, watched
himself pretty well.

Mr. JENNER. You mean he watched his----

Mr. STUCKEY. He seemed to be very conscious about all of his words, all
of his movements, sort of very deliberate. He was very deliberate with
his words, and struck me as being rather articulate. He was the type of
person you would say would inspire confidence. This was the incongruity
that struck me, the fact that this type of person should be with this
organization. That is the gist of the first meeting.

I asked him to meet me at the radio station that afternoon about 5
o'clock for the interview, and he agreed.

Mr. JENNER. This was to be an interview preliminary to a broadcast?

Mr. STUCKEY. Well, this was to be a recorded interview prior to the
broadcast.

Mr. JENNER. Why would you do that?

Mr. STUCKEY. To avoid the possibility of errors. It is a risky business
going on live. You know, you never know when you are going to slip up
and, particularly, with somebody as controversial as a representative
of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee you want to know what you have in
hand before you put it on.

During that day I thought quite a bit about Oswald before he arrived
at the station for the interview, and I was interested in his
articulateness and in discussing this organization, so I had decided
during the day that instead of just interviewing him for 5 minutes,
which was the length of my program, that I would just let him talk as
long as he wanted to.

Mr. JENNER. In the private interview with you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; but record it.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; of course.

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes. And then I thought after doing that I could take some
excerpts out for a 5-minute program, and then ask the management at the
station if they would be interested in running the whole thing in toto
as a demonstration of the line of this organization. So this was the
decision I made before the broadcast.

I drew up a lengthy list of questions, and then I met him that
afternoon about 5 o'clock at the studios of WDSU, 520 Royal Street, New
Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. That is in the French Quarter, is it not?

Mr. STUCKEY. In the French Quarter. He was dressed exactly as he is
shown in this picture.

Mr. JENNER. Garner Exhibit No. 1.

Mr. STUCKEY. Which is Exhibit No. 1, short-sleeved dress shirt with
a tie, a black looseleaf notebook under his arm. There were no
preliminary remarks particularly. We just went immediately into the
studio. It was at this point that he gave me this pamphlet.

Mr. JENNER. Stuckey Exhibit No. 1.

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Is that correct?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is correct. And we were seated--this conversation
was witnessed or listened to by an engineer in WDSU by the name of Al
Campin.

Mr. JENNER. Was that prearranged?

Mr. STUCKEY. Well, you have to have an engineer to record it.

Mr. JENNER. I see.

Mr. STUCKEY. He just happened to be there operating the equipment, but
he was, I mean he was, there, as a witness, and was greatly interested
in it, because like me he hadn't run across too many of these birds,
and we were curious to see how they thought and why.

So at that time then we began a long rambling recorded interview which
lasted 37 minutes, covered a wide range of subjects.

Naturally, a lot of the subjects had to do with Cuba. We discussed the
problem of the refugees leaving Cuba, we discussed as to whether or not
Castro was an independent ruler of an independent nation or whether he
was merely the head of a colony which was the line that I took.

Mr. JENNER. Head of a colony?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; a Russian colony, Cuba. This was the line that I took
in this questioning.

We discussed the economic situation in Cuba, as to what had happened
to the economy since Castro took over. We discussed a few abstracts. I
asked him the definition of "democracy," which was interesting to me.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have a transcript of that interview?

Mr. STUCKEY. I do.

Mr. JENNER. Have you brought one with you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. May I have it, please?

Mr. STUCKEY. Incidentally, I have a letter here that you may or may
not be interested in. Father Clancy is the chairman of the political
science department at Loyola University in New Orleans. I sent him this
transcript as a Catholic and as a political science man just to see
what his opinion was, and he went much stronger than I ever did after
reading that, but the last paragraph, I thought, was interesting, and I
thought you might be interested in reading the letter.

Mr. JENNER. The witness has furnished me a 13-page document on
light-weight, green-tinted paper. The first page is entitled
"Transcript of Taped Interview Between William K. Stuckey and Lee
Harvey Oswald, August 17, 1963," and the last page of which, the last
three lines of which, read:

"STUCKEY: Tonight we have been talking with Lee H. Oswald, secretary of
The Fair Play for Cuba Committee, New Orleans," et cetera. "(Standard
close.)"

I wonder if you would be good enough, Mr. Stuckey, to initial each of
these 13 pages. We will mark this as Stuckey Exhibit No. 2. I suggest
you put your initials at the bottom.

(The document was marked Stuckey Exhibit No. 2 for identification.)

Mr. JENNER. The witness has now placed his initials at the foot of each
of the 13 pages of the transcript.

When and how was this document prepared, Stuckey Exhibit No. 2?

Mr. STUCKEY. I typed it.

Mr. JENNER. You typed it as you were listening to your tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. You have also brought with you the actual original tape of
this interview?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That is the radio tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And this 13-page document is a literal transcription or
translation of that tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; there are some errors, but they are very, very small
errors, largely typographical errors.

Mr. JENNER. Prepared by you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Would you look at the 13-page document, and if there are
any errors other than obvious typographical errors which you would like
to draw to our attention, I wish you would do it. You were going to
look through it and see if there were----

Mr. STUCKEY. I can tell you in advance there are no errors in fact,
and no deletions, with the exception of this last paragraph which I
abbreviated by saying "standard close." All that was, was I would have
been talking with Lee Harvey Oswald--"This is Bill Stuckey, Latin
Listening Post. Good night"--that is all that was, no facts at all.

Mr. JENNER. The words ("standard close") appearing on the last line of
page 13 is a shorthand way of your designating your customary signoff?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; correct.

Mr. JENNER. All right. I offer in evidence Stuckey Exhibit No. 2.

Mr. STUCKEY. I was going to refer to this definition of "democracy"
that he gave.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. Are you interested in it?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. This is interesting to me for a number of reasons, not
just the meaning but how adept this fellow was at taking a question,
any question, and distorting it for his own purposes, saying what
he wanted to say while making you think that he was answering your
question. He was expert in dialectics.

"STUCKEY: What's your definition of democracy?"

Mr. JENNER. You are reading from Stuckey Exhibit No. 2 now?

Mr. STUCKEY. Correct.

"OSWALD: My definition--well, the definition of democracy--that's a
very good one. That's a very controversial viewpoint. You know, it used
to be very clear, but now it is not. You know, when our forefathers
drew up the Constitution they considered that democracy was creating an
atmosphere of freedom of discussion, of argument, of finding the truth;
these rights, well, the classic rights of having life, liberty, and
pursuit of happiness. In Latin America they have none of those rights,
none of them at all, and that is my definition of democracy, the right
to be in a minority and not to be suppressed; the right to see for
yourself without government restrictions such countries as Cuba, and we
are restricted from going to Cuba."

The question was, "What is your definition of democracy?", and we
discussed the passport ban as part of the definition.

Mr. JENNER. In other words, he did not respond to your question?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; except obliquely to make the point.

Mr. JENNER. Did you find that he did that--it will appear, of course,
in that transcript----

Mr. STUCKEY. Constantly throughout the interview.

Mr. JENNER. In your discussions with him he parried your questions by
not answering them.

Mr. STUCKEY. He would--his general attack would be "I am glad you
asked that question, it is very good," and then he would proceed to
talk about what he wanted to talk about, and completely ignore your
questions on occasions. So there were at least half a dozen examples of
that.

Mr. JENNER. In the transcript which you have furnished?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Did you supply a copy of that transcript to anyone else
prior to your bringing Stuckey Exhibit No. 2 today?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I did.

Mr. JENNER. To whom?

Mr. STUCKEY. To the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. JENNER. When you were interviewed by the FBI you supplied the FBI
with a transcript?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; as a matter of fact I gave the tape to the FBI the
Monday following the interview, which would have been August 20, 1963.
I told them I thought it was very interesting, and if they would like
to have a transcript they could copy it, which they did. They made a
copy and then they gave me a copy of their transcript, and returned the
tape to me.

Mr. JENNER. But Stuckey Exhibit No. 2 is the one that you prepared?

Mr. STUCKEY. Correct.

Mr. JENNER. And not one that the FBI prepared.

Mr. STUCKEY. Correct.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

This was on Saturday afternoon. Were you scheduled to go on the air
that evening?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; my broadcast time is 7:30. I met him about 5, about
two and a half hours in advance.

Mr. JENNER. Had you contemplated that the broadcast that evening would
be a discourse only between you and Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Is that the way it developed?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is the way it developed.

Mr. JENNER. What was the nature of that broadcast? I should say to you
we have from--what is the radio station?

Mr. STUCKEY. WDSU.

Mr. JENNER. From WDSU we have obtained a copy of that tape.

Mr. STUCKEY. Now, you mean of this tape?

Mr. JENNER. No.

Mr. STUCKEY. Because I don't think they have a copy of that tape.

Mr. JENNER. No; the broadcast that evening I am talking about.

Mr. STUCKEY. Is that right? They located it?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. Because I tried to find a copy of that mainly to take it
off the market and never did locate it. I couldn't find it. This must
be a recent development.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; but despite that would you tell us about that
broadcast?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

As I said, this was a 37-minute, rambling interview between Oswald and
myself, and following the interview, first we played it back to hear
it. He was satisfied.

Mr. JENNER. That is, you played back the tape of which Exhibit No. 2 is
a transcript?

Mr. STUCKEY. Correct; Oswald was satisfied. I think he thought he had
scored quite a coup.

Then I went back over it in his presence and with the engineer's help
excerpted a couple of the remarks by Oswald in this. I forget now
what the excerpts were. It has been so long ago. I think we had his
definition of democracy because that, in particular, struck me, and we
had a couple of his comments in which he said Castro was a free and
independent leader of a free and independent state, and the rest of it,
as I recall, was largely my summarizing of the other principal points
of the 37-minute interview, and it was broadcast on schedule that night.

Mr. JENNER. You had watered it down in length to how many minutes?

Mr. STUCKEY. Five minutes.

Mr. JENNER. Five minutes?

Mr. STUCKEY. Actually 4-1/2.

Mr. JENNER. So you took the portions of your 37-minute interview,
which we now have a transcript of, which is Exhibit No. 2, and boiled
that down to 4-1/2 minutes?

Mr. STUCKEY. Correct.

Mr. JENNER. And that was a radio broadcast?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That evening. All right. Was that your last contact with
Mr. Oswald?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; it was not.

Mr. JENNER. Following the broadcast did you have any further
conversation with him, that evening?

Mr. STUCKEY. That evening; no. The only thing that did transpire was
I told him that I was going to talk to the news director to see if
the news director was interested in running the entire 37-minute tape
later, and I told him to get in touch with me, Oswald to get in touch
with me Monday, and I would let him know what the news director said,
and that was all the conversation we had that night, and he went his
way.

I did just that the next Monday, I called the news director and
asked him if he had heard the tape, and he said no. I asked him if
he was interested in running it. I told him I thought it was pretty
interesting, and he said, for some reason, he thought that it would be
more spectacular a little bit--there would be more public interest if
we did not run this tape at all, but instead arrange a second program,
a debate panel show, with some local anti-Communists on there to refute
some of his arguments, which I did. Which I did--I arranged a debate
show for a regular radio feature that WDSU has called "Conversation
Carte Blanche." This is a 25-minute public affairs program that runs
daily. It is almost always interviews of people in the news locally or
this sort of thing.

I was in charge of arranging the panel, so I picked Mr. Edward S.
Butler.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us who he is.

Mr. STUCKEY. He is the Executive Director of the Information Council of
the Americas in New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. What is that organization?

Mr. STUCKEY. It is an anti-Communist propaganda organization. Their
principal activity is to take tape-recorded interviews with Cuban
refugees or refugees from Iron Curtain countries, and distribute these
tapes which are naturally, it goes without saying, these tapes are
very strongly anti-Communist, and they distribute these tapes to radio
stations throughout Latin America. As I recall, they came to have over
100 stations using these tapes regularly.

Well, Mr. Butler is a friend of mine. I knew him as a columnist, and it
just seemed like----

Mr. JENNER. He was an articulate and knowledgeable man in this area to
which he directs his attention?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; so I asked him to be one of the panelists on the
show, which he accepted, and, incidentally, I let him hear the
37-minute tape in advance; and for the other panelist I asked Mr.
Bringuier, Mr. Carlos Bringuier, that we mentioned earlier, as being
the man who led me to Oswald--I asked him to appear on the show to give
it a little Cuban flavor.

And then Oswald called me after it was arranged, and I told him we were
going to arrange the show and would he be interested, and he said,
yes, indeed, and then he said, "How many of you am I going to have to
fight?" That was his version of saying how many are on the panel.

Mr. JENNER. He said this to you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; in a jocular way.

Mr. JENNER. Where did this take place, on the telephone?

Mr. STUCKEY. On the telephone; yes.

This was Monday or Tuesday, the 19th or the 20th of August, whenever it
was that I had informed him of the show.

Mr. JENNER. Had he called you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I gave him my office number so he called me at a
prearranged time. He was very punctual, very punctual. He was always
there on time, all those calls came on time. So I informed him about
this debate show and he agreed. He said he thought that would be
interesting.

Then the next time I see him is on the afternoon of August 21,
Wednesday. I believe this was about 5:30.

Mr. JENNER. Was this to be a preliminary session also?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes--well, no; this was to be a live program. The
Conversation Carte Blanche panel show is not to be prerecorded as the
other one was.

Mr. JENNER. I appreciate that, but I was just talking about your
meeting with him on Wednesday afternoon, the 21st, at 5:30. The program
went on at what time?

Mr. STUCKEY. At 6:05.

Mr. JENNER. I see. It was not long before the program.

Mr. STUCKEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. It was not a preliminary interview such as you had had,
which is transcribed as Stuckey Exhibit No. 2?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; there were some comments of which I will tell you
later.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. STUCKEY. I would like to add this, this is very interesting,
and gave a little bit of spice to this encounter. During that day,
Wednesday, August 21, one of my news sources called me up and said, "I
hear you are going to have Oswald on Carte Blanche." I said, "Yes, that
is right." He said, "We have some information about Mr. Oswald, the
fact that he lived in Russia for 3 years."

He had omitted reference to this in the 37-minute previous interview,
and in all of our conversations.

Mr. JENNER. He had never mentioned that subject prior to that?

Mr. STUCKEY. As a matter of fact, he gives an account of his background
in here.

Mr. JENNER. In Stuckey Exhibit No. 2?

Mr. STUCKEY. Right; in which he completely omits this. Would you like
me to read it?

Mr. JENNER. Yes; you have turned to a particular page?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I will be reading from this. Here is my question.

"STUCKEY:"----

Mr. JENNER. Maybe we can identify the page.

Mr. STUCKEY. This will be page 11.

Mr. JENNER. Page 11 of Stuckey Exhibit No. 2.

Mr. STUCKEY. My question was:

"Mr. Oswald, I am curious about your personal background. If you could
tell something about where you came from, your education and your
career to date, it would be interesting.

"OSWALD:"--this is his reply--"I would be very happy to. I was born in
New Orleans in 1939. For a short length of time during my childhood
I lived in Texas and New York. During my junior high school days I
attended Beauregard Junior High School. I attended that school for 2
years. Then I went to Warren Eastern High School, and I attended that
school for over a year. Then my family and I moved to Texas where we
have many relatives, and I continued my schooling there. I entered
the United States Marine Corps in 1956. I spent 3 years in the United
States Marine Corps working my way up through the ranks to the position
of buck sergeant, and I served honorably having been discharged. Then
I went back to work in Texas and have recently arrived in New Orleans
with my family, with my wife and my child."

There is his answer. He omits the 3 years in Russia by saying that,
referring to the fact that, after leaving the Marine Corps he says he
went to Texas and then to New Orleans. You will note in there he lied
about his rank he achieved in the Marine Corps. Why, I don't know. As
far as I know he was just a Pfc.

Mr. JENNER. He never rose any higher.

Mr. STUCKEY. And, as I recall, he did not go to Warren Eastern High
School over a year.

Mr. JENNER. You have become aware he attended Beauregard only 1 year
rather than 2?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. That he attended Warren Eastern about 6 weeks or 2 months.

Mr. STUCKEY. That was my impression. I mention this because with this
in mind, this is why it was so interesting to me to find out on that
day, August 21, that he had lied to me, that he had, in fact, lived in
Russia for 3 years, and had just recently returned, and this individual
who called me and gave me this information gave me dates of Washington
newspaper clippings that I could check, which were stories about his
leaving for Russia, or rather his appearance in Moscow in 1959.

Mr. JENNER. Now, this information came to you between the time of your
interview transcribed as Stuckey Exhibit No. 2 and the 21st of August
when you were about to put on your debate program, the discussion
program?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. Did this come to you sufficiently in advance to enable you
to do some checking vis-a-vis newspaper or articles?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. And was he unaware when he came in at 5:30 on the afternoon
of Wednesday that you had done this, had received this information and
had done some research?

Mr. STUCKEY. He was unaware of that fact. During that day Mr. Butler
called, after I had already been tipped off about his Russian
residence, Mr. Butler called and said he too had found out the same
thing, I think later; his source apparently was the House Un-American
Activities Committee or something like that.

At any rate, we thought this was very interesting and we agreed
together to produce this information on the program that night.

Mr. JENNER. You were going to face him on the program with this?

Mr. STUCKEY. Unawareness.

Mr. JENNER. You thought it might be a bombshell and be unaware to him.

Mr. STUCKEY. Exactly.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. STUCKEY. And we decided it would be me who would do it as the
introducing participant.

So at about 5:30 that afternoon I arrived at the studio alone. Oswald
appeared, and in a very heavy gray flannel suit, and this is August
in New Orleans, it is extremely hot, that he appears in a very heavy
gray flannel suit, very bulky, badly cut suit, and looking very hot
and uncomfortable. He had a blue shirt on and a dark tie, and a black
looseleaf notebook.

Mr. JENNER. The same one he had had before?

Mr. STUCKEY. As far as I know. We shook hands, passed a few
pleasantries, nothing much of importance.

Mr. JENNER. Were the others present?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; they arrived a little bit later. Oswald was there
first, as usual on time, and then Mr. Butler came in with Mr.
Bringuier. Both looked as if they had pounds and pounds of literature
with them, and statistics.

Mr. JENNER. Did Bringuier and Oswald recognize each other?

Mr. STUCKEY. Oh, yes.

Mr. JENNER. And it was apparent to you they were acquainted?

Mr. STUCKEY. Oh, yes; indeed.

Mr. JENNER. And that Oswald was acquainted with Bringuier and vice
versa?

Mr. STUCKEY. Right.

Mr. JENNER. Had Oswald met Mr. Butler before?

Mr. STUCKEY. I don't know if he had or not. It was my impression that
he had not, but I think he knew who he was. Oswald asked me something
about the organization, and I told him, I said, "Well, it is just like
your organization; it is a propaganda outfit, just on the other side of
the fence," and that satisfied his curiosity.

I think he immediately kissed it off as a hopeless rightist
organization, "You can't reason with those people," that approach.

So it was a somewhat touchy exchange there between Bringuier and Oswald
in the studio. Bringuier, as well as I recall, started out with a
remark like this, saying, "You know, I thought you were a very nice
boy. You really made a good impression on me when I first met you."
Referring to Oswald's visit to Bringuier in the store when Oswald was
posing as an anti-Castro enthusiast, and Bringuier said, "I cannot
understand how you have let yourself become entangled with this group."

He said, "I don't think you know what you are doing."

Oswald said something to the effect that, "I don't think you know
what you are doing," and back and forth such as this. Bringuier said,
"Anytime you want to get out of your organization and join mine there
is a place for you," and he says, "I hope one day you will see the
light."

And again Oswald says, "I hope you see the light," and that was about
all there was to that.

Butler didn't say anything to him particularly. It was just
pleasantries, "How do you do," and such.

Mr. JENNER. How old a man is Butler?

Mr. STUCKEY. Butler is in his late twenties, he is 29 or 30.

Mr. JENNER. Is he an educated man?

Mr. STUCKEY. College, as far as I know. He is advertising, public
relations man before he went into the propaganda business, and that was
about the extent of the exchanges prior to the broadcast.

Then I left to go back to the newsroom, which was a different room
from the room where we were sitting, to get Bill Slatter, who is the
official moderator of the program, and we came back and picked up our
participants and went into the broadcast room.

As I recall, in opening the show Bill Slatter said that myself and
he would be talking to three other people. In other words, I was not
considered a panelist, but there were two station people and three
panel people. This was the way it was explained, and Slatter turned the
program over to me after a very brief introduction and description of
Oswald and a brief capsule of his background in New Orleans to date,
and then he turned the show over to me, and I gave a several-minute
description of the organization, Mr. Oswald and his activities in New
Orleans up to that time, and then I pulled the Russian thing on him.

I did mention--I think I did it this way, I said:

"Mr. Oswald, in the previous interview, gave me a description of his
background. He told me this and that and this and that, but he omitted
some information, to the best of my knowledge," and I mentioned that
that day some newspaper clippings had come to my attention about his
residence in Russia, and I said, "Is this true, Mr. Oswald?"; and
Oswald said, "Yes."

Mr. JENNER. Would you mark what I hand you, Mr. Reporter, as Stuckey
Exhibit No. 3.

(The item was marked Stuckey Exhibit No. 3 for identification.)

Mr. STUCKEY. You may be interested in knowing that the Information
Council of the Americas, Mr. Butler's organization, has since made a
record out of this debate, and just released it about 2 weeks ago,
called "Self-Portrait in Red."

Mr. JENNER. I am going to hand you, to refresh your recollection, if it
needs refreshing, a 10-page document which I have marked for purposes
of identification only as Stuckey Exhibit No. 3. Each of these pages
bears the figure 236 in red ink at the bottom. It is also known here
as, that is, around here, as Commission Document No. 87B. The pages
are numbered at the top 1 through 10, inclusive. It purports to be a
transcript of a tape recording of your broadcast of the evening about
which you speak, a debate on August 21, 1963.

We have obtained from the radio station, WDSU, a duplicate of the tape
itself. Would you take a look at this transcript and perhaps, if you
will run through it, tell us whether it is, to your recollection, a
transcript of your program that night?

Mr. STUCKEY. I would like to say this about this transcript. I think it
is very unfair. These people have put in all of Oswald's hesitations,
his "er's," and that sort of thing. I notice when the AP ran an account
of this after the assassination they had done all of this on Oswald.
They were apparently trying to make him look stupid. Everybody else was
using the "er's," but they didn't put those in.

Mr. JENNER. I will say it is a transcript--your attention is drawn
to the fact that the hesitations of Oswald are included, but the
hesitations of, let us say, even yourself and the other participants,
are not.

Mr. STUCKEY. Are not.

Mr. JENNER. And in that sense it is in some measure a distortion of the
actual tape.

Mr. STUCKEY. A slight distortion. I think it is an unfair thing.

Mr. JENNER. Well, we have the actual tape so the hesitations will
appear, and what I was using this primarily for is to afford you an
opportunity, if you wish to use it, to refresh your recollection of
this program.

What were some of the things that you now recall that struck you about
this dissertation?

Mr. STUCKEY. Well, of course, the principal thing that came out on that
program, aside from the Russian residence, the most striking thing
was his admission that he was a Marxist. We asked him if he was a
Communist--we were always doing this--he was very clever about avoiding
the question. He would usually say, "As I said before, I belong to no
other organization other than the Fair Play for Cuba Committee."

So we asked him this question, of course, and he gave us that answer,
and I asked, "Are you a Marxist?"; and he said, "Yes."

Otherwise, it was--the program was largely speeches by Bringuier and
Butler, and Oswald did not have a chance to ramble much or to talk much
as he had earlier, and most of his answers are rather short.

Mr. JENNER. Did you get into a discussion of democracy and communism
and Marxism and then the distinctions?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes, yes.

Mr. JENNER. The distinctions between them?

Mr. STUCKEY. A brief discussion. We asked him, I say "we," I mean Mr.
Butler asked him the difference between being a Marxist and being a
Communist, and this was a typical oblique Oswald answer. He says, "It
is the same difference between Ghana and Guinea, and even in Great
Britain they have socialized medicine," and that is about the extent of
the answer.

Mr. JENNER. What impression did you have as to this man's deep or
fundamental appreciation of Marxism, democracy, communism, fascism,
socialism, as the case might be?

Mr. STUCKEY. It was my impression he had done a great deal of reading.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have an impression that his knowledge--that he
was, if I may use this expression, that he had a superficial knowledge
as distinguished from a close study with a critical leader or teacher
pointing out to him the fundamental distinctions between these systems?

Mr. STUCKEY. It would be difficult to say. It was apparent he was
acquainted with a wide body of facts and he knew appropriate words and
such from historical points concerning the development of Marxism.

Mr. JENNER. You see I am seeking your impression at the time and not
one that you have formed since.

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; right. Well, I had not run across many Marxists in my
time, and I guess this was about the first professional Marxist I had
run across, and he impressed me as knowing something about the subject.
But again it was difficult to appraise the full measure of his learning
because of his oblique way of answering questions and dodging questions
whenever he did not want to speak about a particular point. I would
hesitate to say whether it was superficial or not. I just don't know
that much about it.

Mr. JENNER. Give me your impression of his demeanor.

Mr. STUCKEY. Confident.

Mr. JENNER. Confident, self-assured?

Mr. STUCKEY. Self-assured, logical.

Mr. JENNER. Able to handle questions?

Mr. STUCKEY. Very well qualified to handle questions, articulate. There
was a little bit of a woodenness in his voice at times, and a little
stiff. This was another impression of mine about Oswald, his academic
manner. If he could use a six-syllable word----

Mr. JENNER. You mean demeanor?

Mr. STUCKEY. Demeanor; yes. If he could use a six-syllable word instead
of a two-syllable word, he would do so. Now that characteristic in
itself would not tend to make it that his learning was superficial.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have the impression he searched for the
multisyllable word?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes, yes; as I say, he would prefer that. I don't know
why--of course, this is all hindsight, but it occurred to me he would
be the type of man who would not use the word, say, "murder," when
he could use something a little more formal like "act of violence,"
this sort of thing. It was, as a matter of fact, his manner was
sort of quasi-legal. It was almost as if he had--as if he were a
young attorney. He seemed to be very well acquainted with the legal
terminology dealing with constitutional rights.

Mr. JENNER. Did this discussion become heated?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; it did. It got rather heated. Mr. Butler, in
particular, more or less took the offensive, and attempted to trip him
up a few times on questions, questions about the nature of Marxism and
of the nature of the Castro regime and this sort of thing, and Mr.
Oswald handled himself very well, as usual. I think that we finished
him on that program. I think that after that program the Fair Play for
Cuba Committee, if there ever was one in New Orleans, had no future
there, because we had publicly linked the Fair Play for Cuba Committee
with a fellow who had lived in Russia for 3 years and who was an
admitted Marxist.

The interesting thing, or rather the danger involved, was the fact
that Oswald seemed like such a nice, bright boy and was extremely
believable before this. We thought the fellow could probably get quite
a few members if he was really indeed serious about getting members.
We figured after this broadcast of August 21, why, that was no longer
possible.

Mr. JENNER. The broadcast ran approximately how long?

Mr. STUCKEY. Twenty-five minutes.

Mr. JENNER. And after the broadcast broke up was that the last of your
contacts with Oswald?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; it wasn't. The others left, and Oswald looked a
little dejected, and I said, "Well, let's go out and have a beer," and
he says, "All right." So we left the studio and went to a bar called
Comeaux's Bar. It is about a half-block from the studio and this was
the first time that his manner kind of changed from the quasi-legal
position, and he relaxed a little bit. This was the first time I
ever saw him relaxed and off of his guard. We had about an hour's
conversation, 45 minutes to an hour, maybe a little more, maybe a
little less, and, by the way, I mentioned his suit being rather gawky
cut, and he told me afterward the suit was purchased in Russia, and
they didn't know much about making clothes over there. Would you like
me to tell you about the conversation?

Mr. JENNER. Yes; I would.

Mr. STUCKEY. We covered a number of points because I was relaxed,
as far as I was concerned professionally I had no other occasion
to contact Oswald. He was off the spot. So we just had a little
conversation. During that conversation he told me that he was reading
at that time about Indonesian communism, and that he was reading
everything he could get his hands on. He offered an opinion about
Sukarno, that he was not really a Communist, that he was merely an
opportunist who was using the Communists.

We had a discussion about alcohol. I noticed he wasn't doing very good
with his beer, and it was a hot night, and he made a reference to that.
He said, "Well, you see, I am not used to drinking beer. I am a vodka
drinker." And he said, "My father-in-law taught me how to drink vodka,"
and then he proceeded to tell me that his father-in-law, who was the
father of his wife Marina, was a Russian Army colonel, and mentioned
that as an army colonel he earned quite a bit more money than Oswald
was earning in Russia. Oswald told me at that time he was making about
80 rubles a month as a factory worker, whereas his father-in-law, the
Colonel, was making something like 300 rubles a month, so he could
afford all the vodka he wanted, and he says that is who taught him to
drink vodka. May I refresh my memory----

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. With some notes?

Mr. JENNER. Yes. You have mentioned Marina for the first time when you
cited her a moment ago. Had he mentioned her prior to that time?

Mr. STUCKEY. Not by name. He only referred to her as "my wife."

Mr. JENNER. Had he identified her as to her origin here or in Russia?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; this was afterward. Naturally when we brought up this
business about the Russian residence, he mentioned she was a Russian
girl and spoke no English. He said that was the way he wanted it
because it gave him an opportunity to keep up his Russian. He wanted to
keep his Russian up, and so they spoke nothing but Russian in the home.

Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about having any family?

Mr. STUCKEY. He mentioned a wife and child. Now on the first broadcast
on Saturday the 17th he mentioned, you will recall, in that brief
digest of his background, he said he had been in the Marine Corps and
then had left and gone to Texas and had recently arrived in New Orleans
with his wife and his child. So in that case he mentioned that he did
have a daughter and a wife. I see something I have omitted about the
first meeting I had with him on the morning of August 17th.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. STUCKEY. At his home.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that.

Mr. STUCKEY. He told me at that time he was working as an assistant to
a commercial photographer in New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. You made no check on that?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; I didn't check him out.

Mr. JENNER. You were not then aware of the fact that, the fact was that
he was not an assistant to a commercial photographer.

Mr. STUCKEY. No; I was not aware of that.

Mr. JENNER. Did he tell you where he was working?

Mr. STUCKEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. You were not aware, therefore, at that time he was at that
time an oiler or a greaser at the Reily Coffee Co.

Mr. STUCKEY. Is that correct?

Mr. JENNER. He was out of work at that time, but he had been.

Mr. STUCKEY. I never could figure out why he referred to the trade of
photography. Had he been involved in photography?

Mr. JENNER. When he was in Dallas prior to his coming to New Orleans
in the spring of 1963, he had been an apprentice with a company,
Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, a commercial advertising photographing company
that produced advertising materials, mats, and photographs, and
that sort of thing. He worked in the darkroom. He had very limited
experience.

Mr. STUCKEY. That apparently is what he was referring to.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. Here is some additional information if you would like me
to bring this out.

Mr. JENNER. Yes; go ahead.

Mr. STUCKEY. I am going to the conversation after the broadcast of the
21st, this is with Oswald and me at Comeaux's Bar. I asked him at that
time how he became interested in Marxism and he said that there are
many books on the subject in any public library. I asked him if he,
if his family was an influence on him in any way. He says, "No," and
he kind of looked a little amused. He said, "No," he says, "They are
pretty much typical New Orleans types," and that was about all he said.

Mr. JENNER. Did he mention his mother?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; he didn't. As a matter of fact, when we referred
to his family, all his references were in the plural, and it was my
impression that he had a mother and a father, sisters, aunts, uncles
and everybody, because the general impression was that there were a
number of people in the family. I was surprised to find out that it
wasn't true, later.

Mr. JENNER. Well, he had relatives in New Orleans, the Murret family.

Mr. STUCKEY. I see.

Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Murret is--Marguerite Oswald, that is his mother--that
was her sister.

Mr. STUCKEY. He told me that he had begun to read Marx and Engels at
the age of 15, but he said the conclusive thing that made him decide
that Marxism was the answer was his service in Japan. He said living
conditions over there convinced him something was wrong with the
system, and that possibly Marxism was the answer. He said it was in
Japan that he made up his mind to go to Russia and see for himself how
a revolutionary society operates, a Marxist society.

Mr. JENNER. He thought that Russia was a Marxist society?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Did you question or discuss with him whether he found that
the system in Russia was a Marxist society or whether it was----

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; he wasn't very pleased apparently with some of the
aspects of Russian political life. Particularly in the factories he
said that a lot of the attitudes and this sort of thing was the same
sort of attitude that you would find in an American factory. There was
a lot of dead-heading, as we say in Louisiana. I don't know what your
expression is.

Mr. JENNER. Goldbricking.

Mr. STUCKEY. Goldbricking. The boss' relatives on the payrolls at nice
salaries.

Mr. JENNER. Nepotism.

Mr. STUCKEY. Nepotism, this sort of thing. Anybody with any authority
at all would just use it to death to get everybody extra privileges
that they could, and a lot of dishonesty, padding of production figures
and this sort of thing. He said he wasn't very impressed.

Mr. JENNER. Were you curious as to why he had come back to the United
States and did you, if you were curious, discuss that subject with him?

Mr. STUCKEY. I don't believe I did. As a matter of fact, I wasn't
curious at the time. We just accepted the fact that he had. In
hindsight we should have asked a lot of questions about him.

Mr. JENNER. The newspaper material that you had read, there was, was
there not, something about his dishonorable discharge from the Marines?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; I don't recall any reference to that in the
newspapers. Incidentally, Oswald had told me and had produced a
discharge card that he was honorably discharged from the Marine Corps.
He produced a card showing this.

Mr. JENNER. When had he done that?

Mr. STUCKEY. This was the night of the 17th at the radio station. Why
he did this I don't know. I forget what the circumstances were. I
recognized the card because, after all, I was a marine myself and I had
one exactly like it.

Mr. JENNER. Did you, in the tete-a-tete in Comeaux's Bar discuss with
him his attempt, when in Russia, to renounce his American citizenship?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; we didn't, because that was alluded to in the
broadcast and, as far as I was concerned, it was satisfactorily
answered.

Mr. JENNER. He does respond--you say, and I am now turning to the
document identified as Stuckey Exhibit No. 3, a transcript of that
radio debate--in your preliminary remarks you advert to the fact
that you had sought an independent source, Washington newspaper
clippings--you advert to the fact that Mr. Oswald, and I am reading,
"Mr. Oswald had attempted to renounce his American citizenship in 1959
and become a Soviet citizen.

"There was another clipping dated 1952 saying Mr. Oswald had returned
from the Soviet Union with his wife and child after having lived there
3 years. Mr. Oswald, are these correct?" And he responds, "That is
correct." I might say for the record that the date 1952 is the date
that appears in this transcript, but the fact is that it was 1962. That
was either a slip of the tongue or it is a typographical error, is that
correct?

Mr. STUCKEY. I think so.

Mr. JENNER. But in this informal conversation following the broadcast
you did not pursue these subjects?

Mr. STUCKEY. Not those. We discussed other subjects. He made another
observation about life in Russia. He said things were extremely bland,
homogenized.

Mr. JENNER. Did he elaborate on that?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I thought it was interesting.

Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that, please.

Mr. STUCKEY. He said that nobody--everybody seems to be almost alike in
Russia because, after all, they had eliminated a lot of the dissenting
elements in Russian society and had achieved fairly homogenous blend of
population as a result.

Mr. JENNER. That was an observation on his part, was it, of an aspect
of Russian society that disappointed him?

Mr. STUCKEY. I don't know. I don't recall him expressing an opinion
as to whether he was disappointed by that. It was a comment. His tone
was slightly acid as if he did not like it, but again this is my
impression. He did say this which was interesting, he said that they
wouldn't allow any Fair Play for Cuba Committees in Russia.

Mr. JENNER. He did?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; he said they just would not because it is the type of
organization that Russian society would just suppress.

Mr. JENNER. Russian society?

Mr. STUCKEY. The Russian authorities would suppress.

Mr. JENNER. Russian authorities suppress any militant organization of
this character.

Mr. STUCKEY. Exactly.

Mr. JENNER. Whether it was Fair Play for Cuba or anything else that is
militant in the sense of being openly critical of the Russian society
and Russian politics?

Mr. STUCKEY. Correct.

Mr. JENNER. Did he observe on that subject, did he observe in the sense
of his feeling that in America you are permitted within the bounds of
the Constitution to enjoy free speech and criticize your Government as
distinguished from not being able to do so in Russia?

Mr. STUCKEY. He didn't add anything other than what I have already
said, but the implication was that we can do that here. "After all, you
know here I have this organization and I am doing this. They probably
would not let me do a similar thing in Russia," and this was his tone.

Mr. JENNER. Do you have any impression as to his regard or judgment
with respect to the government in which he was, whose privileges he was
then exercising?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; he had given lip service a time or two to the fact
that he considered himself a loyal American. He was constantly
referring to rights, constitutional rights, and he made some historical
references. He illustrated the development of these rights in America.

Mr. JENNER. Did this informal conversation at Comeaux's Bar go on, you
said, for about an hour?

Mr. STUCKEY. Approximately an hour.

Mr. JENNER. Was he comfortable in the sense--was he eager, was he
pleased----

Mr. STUCKEY. He was relaxed, he was friendly. He seemed to be relieved
it was all over. My impression was he was relieved that he did not have
to hide the bit about the Russian residence any more, and that it had
been a strain doing so, because his manner was completely different.
There wasn't the stiffness or the guarded words and guarded replies. He
seemed fairly open, and I have no reason to believe that everything he
told me that night was not true. I think it was true.

Mr. JENNER. Was there any difference in his attitude or demeanor with
respect to personal self-confidence, for example, in that Saturday
interview at his home and your interview with him prior to the Monday
night broadcast, taking that as a base, and comparing it with his
attitude in Comeaux's Bar after you had revealed the fact that he had
been in Russia and had attempted to defect?

Mr. STUCKEY. Well, there wasn't any change. He was pretty consistent in
his behavior from the very first time I met him until Comeaux's Bar,
so this was the only notable change I observed. The manner was always
guarded, even from the very first when he came out on his porch on
August 17 in his dungarees, his manner was guarded.

Mr. JENNER. Was it guarded in Comeaux's?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; it was not.

Mr. JENNER. This was much more relaxed?

Mr. STUCKEY. Considerably.

Mr. JENNER. Following that tete-a-tete in Comeaux's Bar for about an
hour, did you ever see Oswald after that?

Mr. STUCKEY. That was the last time I ever saw him.

Mr. JENNER. When was the next time you heard of Oswald?

Mr. STUCKEY. On November 22, 1963.

Mr. JENNER. What was that occasion?

Mr. STUCKEY. The assassination of President Kennedy.

Mr. JENNER. How was it raised, what brought it to your attention?

Mr. STUCKEY. I was watching a TV news broadcast at the time, and they
had a bulletin in which they said a suspect had been arrested in the
assassination, and they mentioned Lee Harvey Oswald, and I fell to the
ground practically; I was surprised.

Mr. JENNER. Was there a video tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes. Following the debate show of August 21, Bill Slatter,
the radio announcer, decided that some news had been made that night
on the show, so he took Oswald back to the studio to repeat some of
the statements he had made on the radio show for video tape. And they
interviewed Oswald for quite a while, I would say for 5 minutes. But I
understand that that night they only ran a brief excerpt of that tape,
and the rest of it they threw away.

Mr. JENNER. The station has supplied us with what tape they did not
throw away, the video tape.

Mr. STUCKEY. They are not throwing away anything at that station any
more, by the way, now.

Mr. JENNER. I suppose not. Without speculation on your part, if you
have a recollection, do you recall whether he was right handed or left
handed?

Mr. STUCKEY. I don't recall. I don't believe that he ever had the
opportunity to use his hand in such a way you could identify it. I
never saw him writing.

Mr. JENNER. At least you never noticed it one way or the other?

Mr. STUCKEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Did he smoke?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; he did not smoke. Again, this was part of my--of
the impression of him that struck me. He seemed like somebody that
took very good care of himself, very prudent, temperate, that sort of
person. It was my impression Oswald regarded himself as living in a
world of intellectual inferiors.

Mr. JENNER. Please elaborate on that. And on what do you base that,
please?

Mr. STUCKEY. Well, I base a lot of this on the conversation that we
had in Comeaux's Bar. After all, I had paid some attention to Oswald,
nobody else had particularly, and he seemed to enjoy talking with
somebody he didn't regard as a stupid person, and it was my impression
he thought that everybody else he had come in contact with was rather
cloddish, and got the impression that he thought that he had--his
philosophy, the way he felt about things, all this sort of thing, most
people just could not understand this, and only an intelligent or
educated person could. I don't mean to say that there was any arrogance
in his manner. There was just--well, you can spot intelligence, or
at least I can, I think, and this was a man who was intelligent, who
was aware that he was intelligent, and who would like to have an
opportunity to express his intelligence--that was my impression.

Mr. JENNER. What impression did you obtain of this man with respect to
his volatility, that is, did you get any impression that he was quick
to anger?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; very well-disciplined, as a matter of fact. After all,
he had been provoked on several occasions that afternoon by Bringuier
and Butler on the show.

Mr. JENNER. Or that evening.

Mr. STUCKEY. That evening; yes. And, of course, Bringuier's attempt
to convert him to the cause of Revolutionary Students Directorate was
presented in a rather biting way, and Oswald just took it, and just
more or less told him that he wasn't interested, whereas other people
might have gotten a little mad. After all, you have to recognize that
Oswald--they were ganging up on him. There were a bunch of us around
there. There were three people who disagreed with him, and he was only
one man, and the fact that he kept his composure with this type of
environment indicates discipline.

Mr. JENNER. That is right. Now, I show you a Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-A.
Do you see Mr. Oswald shown on that exhibit?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Is there a mark or something over his head?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; there is a green cross of some sort.

Mr. JENNER. All right. There is a man to his left, there is an arrow, a
vertical arrow, over that man's head. Do you recognize that person?

Mr. STUCKEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Far to the left, the most extreme left, of the picture is
another man with dark glasses on. He has a green vertical stripe over
his head. Do you recognize him?

Mr. STUCKEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. Now, to the left of the man with the vertical arrow above
his head is a tall rather husky young fellow whose back is turned. Do
you, by any chance, recognize him?

Mr. STUCKEY. This one?

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mr. STUCKEY. No.

Mr. JENNER. I will ask you the general question do you recognize
anybody depicted on Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-A other than Oswald?

Mr. STUCKEY. Oswald is the only person I recognize in that picture.

Mr. JENNER. I show you Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-B. Do you recognize Oswald
on that picture?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; he has the green mark above his head.

Mr. JENNER. That is the vertical mark and it is the only mark on that
photograph, is it not?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. Directing your attention to the group of men on that
photograph in which Oswald is a part although his back is to the group,
do you recognize any of those men shown on that photograph?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; I recognize nobody.

Mr. JENNER. And to the right side of the girl there are some ladies. Do
you recognize any of them?

Mr. STUCKEY. I was just looking over that. One of them looks vaguely
familiar, but--no; I would have to say. No; I don't know the women.

Mr. JENNER. Do you recognize the vicinity or place shown?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; that is the front of the International Trade Mart
Building on Common and Camp Streets in New Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. If I may have that tape so I can put an exhibit number on
it----

Mr. STUCKEY. Do you want to take it now rather than go through all the
letter-writing proceedings?

Mr. JENNER. I am not going to take it, but I am going to mark it and
give it back to you. I don't want to have possession of it. I just want
to look to see----

Mr. STUCKEY. Would it be easier for the Commission if it were made into
a record rather than a tape? I have a record that I have made, my own
personal record.

Mr. JENNER. I will inquire about that. It possibly might be better. You
mean a platter, a disc?

Mr. STUCKEY. A platter, a disc.

Mr. JENNER. I suppose a tape is easier to preserve. A hundred years
from now this tape would be just as true as it is today, that is
assuming it is kept under good conditions, whereas a platter might
deteriorate.

Mr. STUCKEY. That is true.

Mr. JENNER. So I think we had better have the tape.

Mr. STUCKEY. The disc would start decomposing after about the 25th time
you played them, and also they get scratched and such. But one thing
is you can't erase a record and you can erase a tape. That is the kind
of nightmares you have with a tape. I was afraid to have a copy made
of that thing for a long time just out of fear somebody might make a
mistake and it would be erased.

Mr. JENNER. You have insured against that by your disk, a platter?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. Mr. Stuckey, was a recording made on audio tape of the
37-minute interview that you had with Mr. Oswald on Monday, the 17th of
August?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I have made one record which is strictly for my own
use.

Mr. JENNER. You say you made it?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. I take it it was made for you by somebody?

Mr. STUCKEY. It was made for me by Cosimo's Recording Studio in New
Orleans.

Mr. JENNER. From what source was the tape made by the commercial
company you have named?

Mr. STUCKEY. From----

Mr. JENNER. What was used to make the tape? Did you have a tape and you
made a copy of the tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; they took my original tape and from that they made the
disc.

Mr. JENNER. I see. We are a little confused here. You have an audio
tape of the 37-minute interview, do you?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I do.

Mr. JENNER. And you also have a wax disk?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. It is the wax disk which is the disk recording from the
original tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. And it is the wax disk that was made by the commercial
people you have named?

Mr. STUCKEY. True.

Mr. JENNER. What I am getting at, Mr. Stuckey, was an audio tape
transcript made of your interview with him on the 17th of August 1963?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Who made the original tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. The original tape was made by WDSU radio in the studios of
WDSU, and the engineer doing the taping was Mr. Al Campin.

Mr. JENNER. Do you know what happened to that original tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I have it; it is in my possession.

Mr. JENNER. Did you bring it with you today?

Mr. STUCKEY. No; this is a copy which you have in your hand.

Mr. JENNER. Did you bring a copy of that tape, which is Stuckey Exhibit
No. 4?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is correct?

Mr. JENNER. From what source did you obtain the original tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. From WDSU. When the management of WDSU decided not to run
that tape but instead to have the debate, the second show, then they
gave me the tape.

Mr. JENNER. What is now marked as Stuckey Exhibit No. 4 is a
reproduction on tape of the original tape?

Mr. STUCKEY. That is correct.

Mr. JENNER. Who made the reproduction which is Stuckey Exhibit No. 4?

Mr. STUCKEY. Cosimo's Recording Studio.

Mr. JENNER. Where are they located? Do you happen offhand to recall the
address?

Mr. STUCKEY. It is on Governor Nichol's Street in the 500 block.

Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us the full name of that company?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; Cosimo's Recording Studio, I believe it is.

Mr. JENNER. Did you have more than one tape reproduction made of that?

Mr. STUCKEY. Yes; I have had--how many do I have? I have two copies and
the record in addition to the original tape, so there are four pieces
of, four items involved.

Mr. JENNER. You will recall, Mr. Stuckey, that you were good enough
when I was in New Orleans to take me over to the radio station, what is
the name of it again?

Mr. STUCKEY. WDSU.

Mr. JENNER. WDSU, and there was played in my presence and in my hearing
a tape transcript of your 37-minute interview with Oswald on the 17th
of August 1963. Is the tape which I have in my hand, marked Stuckey
Exhibit No. 4, the tape that was played that evening in my presence?

Mr. STUCKEY. It is.

Mr. JENNER. And it is in the same condition now as it was at the time I
heard it?

Mr. STUCKEY. Exactly.

Mr. JENNER. It is in the same condition now as it was when it was
prepared by Cosimo's?

Mr. STUCKEY. Correct.

Mr. JENNER. Subject to my understanding with you that you will receive
a communication from Mr. Rankin respecting the preservation of this
tape against commercial use, I offer Stuckey Exhibit No. 4 in evidence.
I am going to return the tape to you so that there will be no question
in your mind but what, in the meantime, until you do receive Mr.
Rankin's letter, that the tape has been in your possession, and no one
has made, surreptitiously or otherwise by accident or any fashion, a
copy of it.

Mr. STUCKEY. Very good.

Mr. JENNER. I think I will state for the record, Mr. Reporter, that in
an off-the-record discussion with Mr. Stuckey respecting the audio tape
of the interview of August 17, 1963, Stuckey Exhibit No. 4, Mr. Stuckey
has agreed that he will supply or return, let us say, Exhibit No. 4 to
us upon his receipt of a communication from Mr. Rankin, as counsel for
the Commission, that the tape when redelivered to us and becomes part
of the record of the Commission, will not be subjected to use for any
commercial purpose and reproduction.

Mr. STUCKEY. I would like to ask for one qualification.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. STUCKEY. I would like my attorney to read over the letter before----

Mr. JENNER. Of course.

Mr. STUCKEY. Before sending you the tape, and in case we suggest
possibly some changes----

Mr. JENNER. I think that is wise. Since I am returning the tape to you,
why, I am sure you won't send it back unless your counsel is satisfied
that you are reasonably protected, because we appreciate the fact that
this is personal property and that it has some commercial value to
you and, frankly, we would be a little bit surprised if you were not
concerned about preserving that.

I think that is all. Is there anything that you would like to add, that
you think might be helpful to the Commission in its investigation of
the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

Mr. STUCKEY. I think we have covered just about everything.

Mr. JENNER. All right.

Mr. STUCKEY. Certainly all the hard facts.

Mr. JENNER. What is that?

Mr. STUCKEY. I say certainly all the hard facts. The rest is just a lot
of speculation and such.

Mr. JENNER. One other thing. Give Bringuier's physical description,
describe Bringuier physically to me, please.

Mr. STUCKEY. Describe Oswald?

Mr. JENNER. No; Bringuier.

Mr. STUCKEY. He is about 5 feet 10 inches. He is not particularly
dark-skinned, although his hair is black, his eyes are brown. He has
the beginnings of a paunch, although his build is generally rather
slender; he wears glasses, smokes cigars. I can't think of a thing else.

Mr. JENNER. OK. I guess that is about it.



AFFIDAVIT OF HORACE ELROY TWIFORD

The following affidavit was executed by Horace Elroy Twiford on July
11, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Harris, ss_:

I, Horace Elroy Twiford, 7018 Schley Street, Houston, Texas, being duly
sworn say:

1. I have been a resident of Houston since May, 1956, and I am a
merchant seaman. I am a member of the Socialist Labor Party.

2. The first time I ever heard of Lee Harvey Oswald was in July 1963,
when The Headquarters of the Socialist Labor Party in New York wrote me
that Oswald had requested literature. The New York Headquarters usually
furnishes me with the names of any persons in the Texas area who make
inquiries about the Socialist Labor Party. I then routinely mailed
Oswald literature concerning the Socialist Labor Party to a box number
in Dallas appearing on Twiford Exhibit No. 1. I had my return address
on the envelope containing the material I sent to Oswald.

3. Twiford Exhibit No. 1 is the envelope which Oswald sent to the
Socialist Labor Party in New York, and which they in turn sent to me.

4. The handwritten note across the front of this envelope, containing
the words "Labor Day issue WP, 9/11/63" is in my handwriting and
indicates that I mailed to Oswald on September 11, 1963, the Labor Day
issue of the "Weekly People." I do not recall if this was the first
time I sent him material.

5. I recollect having flown home to visit my wife on September 27,
1963, from New Orleans, Louisiana, where the S.S. Del Monte, the ship
upon which I was working, was docked. Either at this time or on October
1, when the S.S. Del Monte reached Houston, my wife told me that a L.
H. Oswald had called and asked for me during the week. My wife had
written his name and the words "Fair Play for Cuba Committee" on a
piece of paper in order to mention the telephone call.

6. I recollect that my wife told me that this telephone call had taken
place during the week preceding my visit home. I had been home on the
previous weekend, and neither at that time nor prior thereto had my
wife said anything about a telephone call from Oswald.

7. I have never seen nor heard from Lee Harvey Oswald.

Signed this 11th day of July 1964.

    (S) Horace Elroy Twiford,
        HORACE ELROY TWIFORD.



AFFIDAVIT OF MRS. ESTELLE TWIFORD

The following affidavit was executed by Mrs. Estelle Twiford on July 2,
1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Harris, ss_:

I, Mrs. Estelle Twiford, 7018 Schley Street, Houston, Texas, being duly
sworn say:

1. I am the wife of Horace Elroy Twiford.

2. In late September of 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald telephoned my house and
asked to speak to my husband. I told him that my husband was at sea.
Oswald inquired as to how my husband had his address. He also said that
he had hoped to discuss ideas with my husband for a few hours before
he flew down to Mexico. He said he only had a few hours. I assume he
was calling from the Houston area since he did not, to my knowledge,
place a long distance call. However, he did not specifically say that
he was in Houston. I have no information concerning his whereabouts
when this call was placed. I told him if he desired to correspond with
my husband, he could direct a letter to 7018 Schley Street, Houston,
Texas, and I would see that my husband received it.

3. I cannot recall the date of the call, but I think it occurred during
the week prior to the weekend my husband flew home to visit me from New
Orleans where his ship was docked. I recall, my husband had shipped out
the weekend prior to the call.

4. I cannot recall the exact time he called, but I think that it was in
the evening, sometime between 7:00 and 10:00 o'clock. I was not working
during this period.

5. I wrote down on a slip of paper that Oswald had called and that he
mentioned he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. I did
this in order to remember to tell my husband about the call. I told my
husband about the call on the weekend he visited me. I have initialed
and released note made of telephone call. (To Secret Service.)

6. Oswald did not state what he was going to Mexico for, nor did he
state how long he would be there.

7. Other than the above mentioned telephone call, I have never had any
contact with Lee Harvey Oswald.

8. I am not a member of the Socialist Labor Party.

Signed this 2d day of July 1964.

    (S) Mrs. Estelle Twiford,
        MRS. ESTELLE TWIFORD.



TESTIMONY OF VIRGINIA H. JAMES

The testimony of Virginia H. James was taken at 2:15 p.m., on June
17, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Messrs.
William T. Coleman, Jr., and W. David Slawson, assistant counsel of the
President's Commission. Thomas Ehrlich, Special Assistant to the Legal
Adviser, Department of State, was present.


Mr. COLEMAN. Miss James, would you state your name for the record?

Miss JAMES. Virginia H. James.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you mind raising your right hand?

Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give is the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Miss JAMES. I do.

Mr. COLEMAN. Miss James, as you know, you are the International
Relations Officer, Office of Soviet Affairs, in the Department of
State. You will be asked to testify about your actions with respect to
Oswald concerning his attempt to return to the United States commencing
in 1961, and his attempt to secure a visa for his wife, Marina.

You will also be questioned concerning your actions in connection with
obtaining a waiver of Section 243(g) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act for Marina, and what part, if any, you had in getting the Bureau
of Immigration and Naturalization to reverse its initial decision to
refuse such waiver. And I will also ask you a few questions on whether
you have any knowledge concerning actions taken by the Department in
1959 when Oswald first attempted to renounce his American citizenship.
Would you state for the record your present address?

Miss JAMES. 2501 Q Street NW.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are you presently employed by the Federal Government?

Miss JAMES. I am employed by the Department of State in the Office of
Soviet Union Affairs.

Mr. COLEMAN. What is your official title?

Miss JAMES. International Relations Officer.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you occupy that position from 1959 through to date?

Miss JAMES. I did; and do still.

Mr. COLEMAN. I have shown you, and I take it you are generally familiar
with, the resolution of Congress which was adopted by Congress in
connection with this Commission.

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. To the best of your present knowledge, Miss James, could
you tell me the first time you heard the name Oswald?

Miss JAMES. When I read a copy of the telegram from the American
Embassy at Moscow, dated, as I recall, October 30, 1959, saying that
Oswald had called at the Embassy and had attempted to renounce his
American citizenship.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you accept my suggestion if I told you that that
telegram was dated October 31 rather than the 30th?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why did you receive, obtain or see a copy of the telegram?

Miss JAMES. To begin with, it is my function in the Department of State
in the Office of Soviet Union Affairs, to handle matters relating to
visas, issuance of visas and passport matters from the political angle
only.

Mr. COLEMAN. For what area?

Miss JAMES. For the Office of Soviet Union Affairs, and it is part of
our responsibility to know what goes on in the American Embassy in
Moscow, and to see how it is handled in order that we can continue
our function of advising, helping and assisting so it is routine for
our office to get a copy of all these telegrams. Practically every
telegram that goes back and forth between the Embassy in Moscow and the
Department, both ways, comes through our office.

Mr. COLEMAN. What did you do after you received the telegram, or saw a
copy of the telegram?

Miss JAMES. I think we took no action at that time. We read it with
a great deal of interest, as we do all of this type of case of a
potential defector, and a person who is an American citizen who is
renouncing American citizenship is very unusual. I don't recall any
action except that I know it was a source, I mean the subject of
unhappy conversation in the office, to see this man carrying on this
type of action.

Mr. COLEMAN. You knew, didn't you, that within 2 or 3 days after the
telegram was received, that the State Department sent a reply to the
Embassy?

Miss JAMES. I must have seen it. I notice from the file copy I cleared
it, but I don't remember that exact telegram.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 916, which is a copy of
the telegram.

Miss JAMES. I recall this.

Mr. COLEMAN. You do recall it?

Miss JAMES. I do.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall clearing the text of it?

Miss JAMES. I can't recall clearing the text of it, but I am perfectly
sure that it was a natural thing for me to clear the text.

Mr. COLEMAN. They normally would clear it with your office?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. And so, therefore, when it is recorded in the lower
left-hand corner that it had been cleared with you, you have no doubt
of the accuracy of that statement?

Miss JAMES. I have no reason to doubt.

Mr. COLEMAN. The accuracy of that statement?

Miss JAMES. Because we, the Office of Soviet Union Affairs, try to get
all offices in the Department to clear everything that is going to
Moscow.

Mr. COLEMAN. After clearing the telegram, what was the next time that
you had anything to do with the name Oswald, to the best of your
knowledge?

Miss JAMES. As I recall, we had a copy of the report that came in from
the Embassy telling more in detail about his appearance at the Embassy,
and I also read it in the Washington papers.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could we mark as James Exhibit No. 1, and I show you--a
reference sheet from Bernice Waterman to EE:SOV, Virginia James, under
date of November 25, 1959, and I ask you do you remember seeing that
reference sheet?

(The document referred to was marked James Exhibit No. 1 for
identification.)

Miss JAMES. Yes; I remember seeing it in this form [pointing to
document in the file].

Mr. COLEMAN. That [James Exhibit No. 1] is a photostatic copy?

Miss JAMES. Yes; I mean the yellow [copy in the file] I recall.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know why you asked them to send you a copy of the
telegram of November 2?

Miss JAMES. Again, it is in accordance with my continuing
responsibility to follow these cases of visa and passport matters,
and the only way we can be informed is to have all the incoming and
outgoing correspondence.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you received that document which has been marked as
James Exhibit No. 1, did you receive other material from Miss Waterman
in connection with Oswald during the period November 2, 1959, to July
1961?

Miss JAMES. I don't recall having received anything from Miss Waterman,
but I am sure that we would have had copies of anything coming back and
forth, back from the Embassy on the case which we would have read.

Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, you would say that you or someone in your
office should have received in the normal course every Embassy Despatch
dealing with Oswald that went to the Department of State?

Miss JAMES. Routine. In fact, it would have been out of order if we
hadn't gotten it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you early in December 1959 draft a letter for Mr.
Davis' signature to Mr. Snyder dealing with the general question of how
he should handle people who want to renounce their citizenship in the
Soviet Union?

Miss JAMES. May I ask is that the letter in which we tried to give him
helpful advice in handling cases of people who tried to renounce?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.

Miss JAMES. Yes; and, as I recall--if it is the letter I think--it
included several paragraphs that had been contributed by Mr. Hickey in
the Passport Office. I am not sure that is the one. I would like to see
it, please.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a photostatic copy of a letter which has
already been marked Commission Exhibit No. 915. It is from Nathaniel
Davis to Richard E. Snyder, and it is under date of December 10, 1959,
and it is State Department File Document No. XIII-40. I ask you whether
you drafted that letter.

Miss JAMES. As I recall, I did. I am sure I did, in fact.

Mr. COLEMAN. You were replying to Mr. Snyder's letter to Mr. Boster,
under date of October 28, 1959, which has already been marked as
Commission Exhibit No. 914, is that correct?

Miss JAMES. As I read this letter, it didn't refer specifically to the
Oswald case.

Mr. COLEMAN. That is because the Oswald case hadn't yet occurred.

Miss JAMES. Yes; I mean the effect of renouncing. I mean it had no
relation; yes. He had called that in. Yes; I remember that. This isn't
the one, though. You just handed me one by Mr. Snyder to Mr. Davis.

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.

Miss JAMES. Now, you asked me if I drafted it. I did draft it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Miss James, I take it that after you drafted the letter of
December 10, Commission Exhibit No. 915, that from that time until some
time in July 1961 that you had no knowledge of any actions with respect
to Oswald.

Miss JAMES. As I recall, I did not, unless, as I say, there had been
something in from Moscow in the ordinary routine way it would have gone
across my desk.

Mr. COLEMAN. On July 11, 1961, or shortly thereafter, perhaps on July
12, the State Department received a Foreign Service Despatch dated July
11, 1961, from the American Embassy in Moscow, which has already been
marked as Commission Exhibit No. 935. I show you a photostatic copy
of Commission Exhibit No. 935 and ask you whether you have seen the
original or a copy of that document?

Miss JAMES. Yes; I recall this.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, after you saw that, what did you do?

Miss JAMES. As I recall, at that time, in 1961, through that period
there were several persons in the Soviet Union who attempted or could
be placed in the category of defectors. Webster was one, these various
people that Mr. Snyder mentioned, and this was a very serious question.
We discussed these matters in our office, and so when we saw this,
we immediately were interested in it, and the most important thing
to our mind was what answer is going to be made to it. So I think I
called Miss Waterman and wanted to know what the Passport Office, what
action they were going to take on the letter, and told her that SOV was
interested and we wanted to clear it, as I recall.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you speak first to Mr. Boster about it?

Miss JAMES. Yes; I would have talked to Mr. Boster about this. He was
interested in it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Who is he?

Miss JAMES. He was officer in charge of our office at that time.

Mr. COLEMAN. Was he your superior?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. What did you tell Miss Waterman?

Miss JAMES. As I recall, I would not have made any policy, any effort
to judge what they would do, but I would only say we want to know what
action you are going to take. That is the way I recall that I would
handle it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you say that the Passport Office was the only office
of the State Department whose communications to Moscow are not cleared
in the SOV?

Miss JAMES. Miss Waterman says I did, and I wouldn't be surprised if I
had said it. I know we all felt many times that we would like to have
had more of the communications cleared with us, and I have no doubt
that I must have said it if she said I did.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall her replying that she had never heard
that----

Miss JAMES. Yes; I do remember at one time she said she didn't recall
that this was a necessity, that they had to clear everything with us.

Mr. COLEMAN. But she did tell you that she would put a memorandum in
the file to show that there was a special interest of the SOV in the
reply to the Embassy Despatch of July 11?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. What was the special interest of the SOV?

Miss JAMES. Again, it is the same interest I outlined before, which
is our responsibility of advising and knowing what is going on in the
Embassy in Moscow. We are the political office. We are responsible for
the Embassy, and we work together very closely, and we want to be sure
that what they send in is answered, how it is answered, and it is our
routine way of working to be sure that any despatch is answered, and
especially one of this type where we are interested in the case because
of the nature of the case.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you an operations memorandum from the Department of
State to the American Embassy in Moscow, dated August 18, 1961, which
has already been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 939, and I ask you
if you saw a copy of that memorandum at or around the time when it was
sent, namely in August 1961?

Miss JAMES. My reply is we should have seen it, but whether we did or
not I don't think we did according to this file.

Mr. COLEMAN. You are saying there is nothing on the file which
indicates that you got a copy.

Miss JAMES. Nothing on the file that indicates we had it.

Mr. COLEMAN. You said that----

Miss JAMES. But I think we must have known that they made this decision.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything to do with the making of the
decision?

Miss JAMES. No; I don't think I can say we had anything to do with the
making of the decision. Those matters are legal decisions, and the
Passport Office would make it on the basis of their information.

Mr. COLEMAN. You or your office never called, to the best of your
knowledge----

Miss JAMES. To needle them on to make it? No.

Mr. COLEMAN. To make it one way or the other?

Miss JAMES. No.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell me from your file the next document that
you looked at after receiving a copy of the Embassy despatch of July
11, 1961?

Miss JAMES. I have some notes I think will help me better than the file
which isn't in chronological order. I think it would have been the
Embassy report asking for a security advisory opinion on Mrs. Oswald's
visa application, which would be August 28, 1961, Commission No.
X-26----

Mr. COLEMAN. You mean State Department number.

Miss JAMES. I say, State Department No. X-26(2).

Mr. COLEMAN. Can the record show that the Commission exhibit number on
that document is Commission Exhibit No. 944.

Now, you say you received a copy of the August 28, 1961----

Miss JAMES. Yes, sir; I received that.

Mr. COLEMAN. Operations memorandum----

Miss JAMES. Twenty-five.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, after you received a copy, what did you do?

Miss JAMES. I have no exact remembrance of that, but I can tell you
what my practice is. In receiving a document like this, and we have
many cases similar, I keep it some place handy, and I will check with
the Visa Office and see what they are going to do about it, and are
they going to--are they handling it. Then we follow through to see if
she is passed by the various security offices. We are aware when these
come in that a person has an exit visa. This time it was before the
exit visa, I think. Yes--well, we were trying to get this case prepared
so it wouldn't be held up in Moscow because of investigations that
might be delayed on this side.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why would you do that?

Miss JAMES. Only because it is our regular practice to expedite these
matters.

Mr. COLEMAN. Wouldn't that depend upon whether the case was meritorious
or not?

Miss JAMES. Yes; but I mean as a general thing we would expedite,
hoping it would be expedited until it its turned down. Then if it is
turned down, that is the end of it.

Mr. COLEMAN. What you are saying is that SOV just wants to make sure
that all the paperwork gets done, that you are really not making the
decisions but you don't want any decision held up on the ground that
the papers aren't there, but you have no particular interest which way
the decision would be made?

Miss JAMES. Yes; we have an interest in that. We know from our policy
what we think is good for the U.S. Government, and we would hope that
cases are handled in that framework.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you say that there was a decision in the Oswald case
that the best thing for the United States was to get Oswald out of
Moscow, Russia, and back to the United States, even if he had renounced
his citizenship?

Miss JAMES. I can't go on that because that is a supposition, but
on the basis of the case we felt that it was better for the U.S.
Government to bring Oswald back.

Mr. COLEMAN. Who made that decision?

Miss JAMES. Again, that is our general policy. When we received this
OMV asking for an advisory opinion on Mrs. Oswald's visa application,
we already knew that the Passport Office had approved her husband's
citizenship.

Mr. COLEMAN. So you say, therefore, that once it was clear that Oswald
was still an American citizen, that you felt it was to the interests of
the United States?

Miss JAMES. Of the United States?

Mr. COLEMAN. To get him out of Russia?

Miss JAMES. To get him out of the Soviet Union, and also to bring his
family.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, could you look in file No. VIII of the State
Department, Document No. 21. Is that a telegram?

Miss JAMES. No; that is a wire.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you read what it says? Will you describe to whom it
is sent and tell me what it means?

Miss JAMES. It says, it is addressed to the American Embassy in Moscow
and refers to this request for an advisory opinion----

Mr. COLEMAN. It has typed thereon: SOV, Miss James. You signed it,
didn't you?

Miss JAMES. No; this was the Visa Office telegram, and in fact I didn't
initial that telegram. It has my name on it, but Mr. Owen initialed it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Does it have your name?

Miss JAMES. It has my name typed on it, but Mr. Owen initialed it.

Mr. COLEMAN. On October 3, 1961, a cable was sent to the Embassy in
Moscow having something to do with Oswald. Would you indicate for the
record what the cable said?

Miss JAMES. As I understand it, the cable authorized the American
Embassy in Moscow to issue a visa to Mrs. Oswald if when she appeared
there was nothing against her otherwise derogatory, and the cable also
indicated that her membership in the Trade Union would not affect the
issuance of a visa, that such membership did not indicate that she was
a Communist.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, the cable or the copy that I have seen indicates that
it was typed by you, at least your name appears on it.

Miss JAMES. No; it was drafted by the Visa Office, drafted by V. Smith,
typed by initials RLC, signed in the Visa Office by Frank L. Auerbach,
and sent to the Soviet Desk, Office of Soviet Union Affairs, for
clearance, typed "SOV Miss James" and in parentheses "(in substance),"
and I apparently was out that day and it has Mr. Owen's initials on it,
and there is another initial which I don't identify, but mine are not
on that.

Mr. COLEMAN. But to the best of your recollection you never saw that or
had anything to do with it?

Miss JAMES. Never saw that cable, but I was aware that they approved it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Had there been some discussion of the operation memorandum
of August 28, 1961, Commission Exhibit No. 944, in your office as to
whether Mrs. Marina Oswald was eligible for a nonquota immigrant visa?

Miss JAMES. I don't recall any special detailed discussion, except
that this was a case, an unusual case, which we would be interested in
following.

Mr. COLEMAN. Were you the one in the office who had the initial contact
with the INS, in connection with the waiver of section 243(g)?

Miss JAMES. As I recall, I had no contact with INS at that time.
I never remember discussing these cases directly with INS. Our
conversations were all with the Visa Office.

Mr. COLEMAN. You dealt directly with the Visa Office?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Is Mr. Crump in your office?

Miss JAMES. I was going to say I dealt with Mr. Crump in the Visa
Office at that time.

Mr. COLEMAN. But he is not in your office?

Miss JAMES. No; he was in the Visa Office, now assigned abroad.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you know that the Visa Office had made a request of
INS to get it to, (1) determine whether Mrs. Oswald was eligible to
come into the country, and, (2) whether it would waive the section
243(g) provision? I just asked you, Miss James, what you knew. When was
the first time you knew that----

Miss JAMES. When Mr. Crump told me that INS had approved the petition
of the husband but had not approved the request for waiver of section
No. 243(g).

Mr. COLEMAN. Prior to that time, you had nothing to do with the visa
request or the section 243(g) waiver?

Miss JAMES. No; I don't recall having anything to do with it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall----

Miss JAMES. As I recall, it was a surprise to me that it was refused.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you had nothing to do with the first petition?

Miss JAMES. No.

Mr. COLEMAN. You weren't the one that sent the petition from the
Department of State to INS?

Miss JAMES. No; that is routine visa work.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall when Mr. Crump informed you that INS had
refused to grant the waiver under section 243(g)?

Miss JAMES. I don't recall the date. I do recall his informing me that
they had had this information from INS that the petition was approved,
but that the section 243(g) waiver was not approved and, therefore,
it looked as though Mrs. Oswald would not be able to come directly to
the United States. If she came at all she would have to go via another
country that did not have this sanction against it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could you explain for the record just what the sanction is
under section 243(g)?

Miss JAMES. Yes; the sanction is that the United States will not
issue an immigration visa to a citizen of a country which refuses to
accept a deportee from the United States based on the reasoning that
if you can't deport to that country, if a person turns out to be an
unsatisfactory immigrant, you are stuck with that immigrant.

Mr. COLEMAN. Does that mean that the person cannot come into the United
States?

Miss JAMES. No; it means that Mrs. Oswald could have gone to Belgium,
France, England, any other country that accepts deportees, and applied
for an immigration visa and have been admitted without any question on
a section 243(g) waiver.

Mr. COLEMAN. I have marked as James Exhibit No. 2 a memorandum from
Robert I. Owen to John E. Crump, under date of March 16, 1962, and
the subject of the memorandum is: "Operation of sanctions imposed by
Section 243(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act in case of Mrs.
Marina N. Oswald."

(The document referred to was marked James Deposition Exhibit No. 2,
for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you prepare the original of that memorandum.

Miss JAMES. Yes; I prepared it under Mr. Owen's supervision.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall Mr. Owen asking you to prepare it?

Miss JAMES. This was my responsibility, this case, but I had long
discussions with Mr. Owen on the case as to how we should proceed with
it before I wrote the memorandum.

Mr. COLEMAN. And Mr. Owen told you, "Why don't you draft a memorandum
for Mr. Crump explaining to him the situation?"

Miss JAMES. We came to agreement in a talk as to how to handle the
case, and I drafted the memorandum which would go to Mr. Crump because
he was the officer in the Visa Office handling the case.

Mr. COLEMAN. In the third paragraph of the memorandum it is stated
that: "SOV believes it is in the interest of the U.S. to get Lee Harvey
Oswald and his family out of the Soviet Union and on their way to
this country soon. An unstable character, whose actions are entirely
unpredictable, Oswald may well refuse to leave the USSR or subsequently
attempt to return there if we should make it impossible for him to be
accompanied from Moscow by his wife and child."

Did you draft that?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Was this language that Mr. Owen had discussed with you and
told you to put in the memorandum?

Miss JAMES. My way of working is to draft a memorandum in rough draft.
I give it to Mr. Owen. He and I--he might well have put in some few
words. I don't know just where he would have changed it or whether he
did change it. I can't say. It is impossible to say at this time unless
I had the original draft, but I know he was in agreement with this.

Mr. COLEMAN. Were you the one that brought up the point that Oswald was
an unstable character, or was that something Mr. Owen contributed?

Miss JAMES. I believe the Department--I will say our office was sure
that he was an unstable character by the very fact that he had tried
to renounce his American citizenship, and then come--by the fact he
had tried to renounce his American citizenship, makes him an unstable
character to me.

Mr. COLEMAN. Was it your thought that once he got out of Russia and
back into the United States, that we wouldn't let him go back again?

Miss JAMES. I think we would have--I would have, based on my work in
the office, I would have hoped we would have done everything to keep
him from going back. Whether the passport regulations would have made
this possible, I don't know.

Mr. COLEMAN. You never wrote a memorandum to the Passport Office,
though?

Miss JAMES. No; that if he applies again, don't let him go back--no; we
did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why didn't you do that in the light of the fact----

Miss JAMES. Because there was no reason at this time. He was in the
Soviet Union trying to get out, and it would not have occurred to me to
predict that 5 years from now he might want to go back and we should
put a stop on his passport. In fact, I don't ever recall taking such
action.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you drafted this memorandum, did you send the
telegram to the Embassy which you suggest in the last paragraph should
be sent?

Miss JAMES. I did not send any telegram as far as I know. If it had
been sent, it would have been sent by the Visa Office on the basis of
our recommendation. I would assume if they agreed to this memorandum,
they sent it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Was the memorandum which I have marked as James Exhibit
No. 2 in any way motivated or written as a result of the telegram dated
March 15, 1962, which you received from the Embassy in Moscow, which
says: "Please advise when decision on petition in 243(g) waiver Lee
Oswald wife may be expected," which I have marked as James Exhibit No.
3 and am showing you a copy of it.

(The document referred to was marked James Exhibit No. 3 for
identification.)

Miss JAMES. May I have you repeat that question again, please?

Mr. COLEMAN. I am asking you was the memorandum of March 16, 1962,
drafted by you, which we have marked as James Exhibit No. 2, in any way
motivated by the telegram from the Embassy dated March 15, which I have
marked as James Exhibit No. 3? It came out of State Department file
IV-13.

Miss JAMES. My memory is that it was not motivated in entirety,
although undoubtedly the telegram brought the case to our attention.
As I recall in those days or weeks preceding March 16, I had been in
conversation with Mr. Crump and Mr. Owen and I had been discussing the
case, and I cannot be sure, but I believe that we would have had this
in our mind before the telegram came in. But undoubtedly the telegram
would make us expedite the writing of this memorandum.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you wrote the memorandum of March 16, 1961, did you
draft the letter which Mr. Crump sent to INS, asking it to reconsider
its original decision that it would not waive section 243(g)?

Miss JAMES. May I see a copy of that letter? You asked me if I drafted
it?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.

Miss JAMES. No; I did not draft it, but I believe some of the reasoning
in the letter was based on the memorandum from SOV.

Mr. COLEMAN. Can you tell me who drafted it?

Miss JAMES. Mr. Crump has his initials on the file copy. Again, I
didn't clear that outgoing letter. Mr. Owen cleared it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you draft a memorandum from Mr. Hale to Mr.
Cieplinski, dated March 20, 1962, or did Mr. Crump draft that?

Miss JAMES. Mr. Crump drafted that.

Mr. COLEMAN. March 20, 1962.

Miss JAMES. We have March 23 from Hale to Cieplinski. It was drafted on
the 20th, apparently sent on the 23d.

Mr. COLEMAN. I will mark as James Exhibit No. 3-A a memorandum from Mr.
Hale to Mr. Cieplinski in re immigrant visa of Mrs. Marina H. Oswald,
and ask you whether you have seen a copy of that document.

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. You got a copy, but you didn't draft it?

Miss JAMES. No; you said, did I see a copy of it, I thought.

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; and is that the same document that you described as
the memorandum dated March 23?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. After the memorandum----

Miss JAMES. May I have a moment, please, to read this letter that they
sent to the INS?

Mr. COLEMAN. Sure.

Miss JAMES. Which I don't remember seeing before.

Mr. COLEMAN. You didn't draft that letter?

Miss JAMES. No. Thank you.

Mr. COLEMAN. You say you didn't draft that?

Miss JAMES. No; it was drafted in the Visa Office.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you knew that it had gone out, I take it?

Miss JAMES. I received a copy of it, so, therefore, I knew that they
had sent this to the head of the Special Consular Administration at
that time, SCA.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now after----

Miss JAMES. Special Consular Affairs, I beg your pardon.

Mr. COLEMAN. After that letter was sent out, did you have occasion to
call INS, and ask them to find out what the status of the letter was?

Miss JAMES. To the best of my memory I never called INS on this case.

Mr. COLEMAN. My problem is I have a letter here which is from Robinson
to Michael Cieplinski, and it says at the bottom: "5-29-62 Miss James
SOV called to say she had received letter from Mr. Oswald's mother
saying he had written he had no money and was unable to travel."

Miss JAMES. I would have called the Visa Office on that. That doesn't
mean I called INS.

Mr. COLEMAN. Oh, I see. All your calls were to the Visa Office?

Miss JAMES. Yes; in fact, I think I am clear that in saying that there
is a policy that all approaches to INS are through the Visa Office.

Mr. COLEMAN. I will mark as James Exhibit No. 4 a copy of a letter from
Robert H. Robinson to Mr. Michael Cieplinski, dated May 9, 1962, and I
ask you whether you have seen a copy of that letter.

(The document referred to was marked James Exhibit No. 4 for
identification.)

Miss JAMES. I don't recall having seen it at the time. I do recall
reading it in the file prior to my coming to this meeting.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall making the call that they at the bottom said
you made?

Miss JAMES. I am sure that I did if Mr. Crump put his initials on it. I
don't remember it. I do remember the letter from Mr. Oswald's mother.
In fact, I had some telephone calls from her, also.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall receiving a copy of a telegram from the
Embassy at Moscow, which telegram is dated May 4, 1962, which I have
marked as James Exhibit No. 5?

(The document referred to was marked James Exhibit No. 5 for
identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Have you seen that telegram?

Miss JAMES. An information copy came to EUR, which is European Bureau,
and I am sure that that means that an information copy came on down to
the Office of Soviet Union Affairs, and I would have seen it, and that
is why I called to inquire about the case.

Mr. COLEMAN. And there is a note on there that on May 8, 1962, you
called to inquire about the case and apparently you were told that the
waiver had been granted.

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know why you made the call?

Miss JAMES. Well, I would have considered, reading it today, that this
is an urgent telegram from the Embassy in Moscow wanting some action
from the Department, and I would have made the call to try to get done
what the Embassy was pleading for, action one way or the other on this
case.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you clear this with anybody else within the office?

Miss JAMES. There is nothing to clear on this, only that I called to
find out--I might well have talked to Mr. Owen about this telegram. I
am sure he saw it. The general routing is for telegrams to go through
the officer in charge to the person who handles the specific subject,
but it has been a part of my duty to have called them to----

Mr. COLEMAN. And you say that as a result of getting the telegram from
Moscow, that you without consulting with anybody else in the office
would call and find out the status?

Miss JAMES. I wouldn't have to have any further instruction on that
telegram.

Mr. COLEMAN. I would then like to show you a document which has been
marked as Commission--James Exhibit No. 7 which is a telegram to the
American Embassy in Moscow, dated May 8, 1962, and ask you whether you
sent that telegram.

(The document referred to was marked James Exhibit No. 7 for
identification.)

Miss JAMES. That telegram was sent by the Visa Office of the
Department, and was apparently cleared by me telephonically and
initialed by Mr. Crump as having cleared with me over the telephone.

Mr. COLEMAN. Oh, I see, Mr. Crump is in the Visa Office?

Miss JAMES. Yes; now this gives me a lead to another paper back there,
where I said I had not seen it. It had Mr. Owen's initials or some
initials, which I couldn't identify.

I now identify those initials as Mr. Crump's initials, and, after that,
it said Miss James, in substance. I now realize that he had probably
telephoned to me, cleared it in substance, initialed it, sent it up to
SOV, and Mr. Owen put his initials on it, and I never had my initials
on it for that reason.

Mr. COLEMAN. In other words, you say that this telegram which I have
marked as James Exhibit No. 7, was actually drafted by Mr. Crump as
a result of Mr. Crump's office finding out that the waiver had been
granted?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. That they called you, told you what they were going to do,
and you said, "Fine," and that is how your name got on the telegram?

Miss JAMES. That is why my name is there and Mr. Crump's initials above
it show that he was the officer who cleared it with me.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, I take it in the document that I have marked as James
Exhibit No. 8, which is a telegram dated March 20, 1962, in which the
Embassy at Moscow was instructed to "withhold action on Department's
OMV 61" because the sanction is being reconsidered. That telegram also
was not drafted by you, and the only reason why your name appears on it
is that it was cleared with you over the telephone.

(The document referred to was marked James Exhibit No. 8 for
identification.)

Miss JAMES. Yes; and, again, although that was cleared, those are my
initials, VHJ, that is my initials. It was apparently cleared over the
phone telephonically and also sent it up to us and Mr. Owen and I each
initialed it, VHJ, and O for Owen.

Mr. COLEMAN. But the fact that your name appeared on the telegrams
doesn't mean you wrote them?

Miss JAMES. No; you see, the way the telegrams are in the State
Department, that first line says drafted by, and then underneath is
clearances, and those offices are clearing offices.

Mr. COLEMAN. And could you identify for me a letter which I have marked
James Exhibit No. 6, which is a letter from Michael Cieplinski to Mr.
Farrell, dated March 27, 1962. I ask you whether that is a copy of the
letter which was sent forward to the Immigration Service asking them to
reconsider the waiver?

Miss JAMES. This exhibit is a photostatic copy of the file copy which
is in the file I am examining, and it is an exact copy. I did not clear
it.

Mr. COLEMAN. As far as you know, that is a copy of the letter?

Miss JAMES. An exact copy; yes. I see the initials are carried through.
Everything is exactly the way the file copy is, the Department's file
copy.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to mark as James Exhibit No. 9 a transmittal
slip under date of March 16, 1962, and it bears the signature which
purports to be Virginia H. James, and I ask you whether that is your
signature that appears thereon.

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, what occasioned your sending this transmittal slip to
the American Embassy and the attachment?

Miss JAMES. We wanted the Embassy in Moscow to know what we were doing
on the despatches and telegrams that they sent in, and that we were
in agreement with their recommendation, that we were making these
recommendations to the Visa Office, and this would more or less give
them some assurance that their recommendations were in harmony with our
thinking. This is the way we work, very closely with the Embassy in
Moscow.

When we are in harmony with what they do, we write memos through the
Department. We frequently send memos to them so they say, "Well, we
have made the right recommendation. The Political Office is supporting
us and now we wait for the other offices in the Department."

Mr. COLEMAN. Were you aware, did you know, or did you have anything to
do with suggesting to the Embassy that they should try to send Mrs.
Marina Oswald into the country by her first going to Brussels?

Miss JAMES. No; except that is a regular procedure that we use, we call
it third country procedure. The immigrant can't come directly to the
United States. They do go to another country.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you were not the one to suggest it in the Oswald case?

Miss JAMES. No; it is established procedure, though. It would not be
unusual for any officer in the Visa Office to think of that.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you didn't suggest it?

Miss JAMES. No; I did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, when Mr. Oswald came into the country--when Oswald
left Moscow, I take it you were informed the day he left or the day
after he left, and did you receive a copy of the telegram from Moscow
to the State Department, dated May 31?

Miss JAMES. Yes; our office received it, SOV.

Mr. COLEMAN. I have marked that as James Exhibit No. 10.

(The document referred to was marked James Exhibit No. 10, for
identification.)

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. And you then, after he got back, drafted a letter to
Oswald's mother?

Miss JAMES. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. I will mark that as James Exhibit No. 11.

(The document referred to was marked James Exhibit No. 11 for
identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. This is in file IV, a copy of it. I show you a copy of a
letter from Robert I. Owen to Mrs. Oswald, under date of June 7, 1962,
and ask you whether that is the letter.

Miss JAMES. Yes; I drafted that letter. I recall it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, in connection with the Oswald case, was there any
instance where you wanted to do one thing but somebody told you no,
something else would have to be done?

Miss JAMES. In the Oswald case?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.

Miss JAMES. We worked in harmony on these cases. The Visa Office is
very well--harmonize with SOV policy on these cases. There is no
bickering or unpleasantness or somebody pulling one way or the other.
We seem to go along with them. Every time one comes up they go along in
the regular way based upon established policy.

Mr. COLEMAN. There was no instance where you said, "I think that this
ought to be done" and somebody said, "I don't care what you think, this
is the way it should be done."

Miss JAMES. No.

Mr. COLEMAN. In all these cases you discussed the problem with the Visa
Office and you reached a mutual agreement. You never had a dispute?

Miss JAMES. I recall no such feeling or reactions.

Mr. COLEMAN. You had indicated earlier, Miss James, that there was a
general policy in your office to see that husbands and wives were not
separated. Would you want to describe for the record just what that
policy was?

Miss JAMES. May I go back historically?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.

Miss JAMES. Since the time we first recognized the Soviet Union, we
have had these cases of separated families, spouses, husbands and
wives and children and other relatives who by some reason or another,
mostly because of the operation of Communist policy, have become
separated from their American citizen families. And from the time we
first recognized the Soviets, this has been a problem there. Files are
filled with notes to the Soviet Government asking them to please issue
exit visas to permit certain relatives to join families in the United
States. This has gone on, and I remember hearing an officer say that if
the result of recognizing the Soviet Union was for no other reason than
to assist these people this was a very powerful reason. During World
War II no visas were issued and nobody traveled and this died. Right
after the war we again had the problem of people trying to get their
relatives out, and the number was greatly increased by Russia taking
over those various countries, Lithuania, Estonia, parts of Poland,
parts of Czechoslovakia, Rumania went into the Soviet Union, and we had
the number greatly enlarged.

Then, in addition to that, because of war operations, American
citizens were stationed in the Soviet Union and they had married
Soviet women, and so we had pressing cases of correspondents. American
correspondents, a few people assigned to the Embassy in Moscow who
married Soviet wives, probably about 15 or 16 who were very, what we
would call, worthy cases of good marriages and good people who had made
a good marriage with women we thought were good people, and they have
since made good American citizens.

So in 1953, when Stalin died, we had the first break, and they issued
the visas on this group. And since then we have gone forward with
this. We saw we had a break and so we have been pressing the Soviet
Government to issue visas to clear this problem up.

In 1959 when Mr. Nixon went there, he was importuned by relatives to
help to get their relatives out, I mean American citizens, and he took
a list of about 80 people, and he agreed to take up these cases, and
we added a number of worthy cases, and Mr. Khrushchev said, "I want to
clear up this problem"--present it through channels.

Since then, we have presented it through channels and we have succeeded
in getting about 800 relatives of American citizens out. And the
defector's wife falls into that pattern, because while we are not
sympathetic with these people we know that if we refuse to grant U.S.
visas to a wife of an American citizen, the Soviet Government can
immediately say, "Well, we grant visas to these people, exit visas.
Then you don't allow them to go to the United States. What does this
mean?"

So that was the basis of our whole policy with Marina Oswald, that we
felt that we didn't want to put the Embassy in a position of fighting
for exit visas for relatives, and then when they issue you say, "Well,
this is not quite the kind we want."

Mr. COLEMAN. In other words, you say that once the Passport Office
made the decision that Oswald was still an American citizen, then your
policy that you don't want to separate husbands and wives came into
play, and if the Soviet Union is willing to let both of them out, that
we will let them come in?

Miss JAMES. That is the basic policy. That was the whole interest in
our Office, the Embassy in Moscow's primary interest there as far as
Marina Oswald was concerned, and her child.

Mr. COLEMAN. I have no further questions.

Thank you.



TESTIMONY OF JAMES L. RITCHIE

The testimony of James L. Ritchie was taken at 12:20 p.m., on June
17, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Messrs.
William T. Coleman, Jr., and W. David Slawson, assistant counsel of the
President's Commission, Thomas Ehrlich, Special Assistant to the Legal
Adviser, Department of State, and Carroll H. Seeley, Jr., were present.


Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Ritchie, will you state your full name?

Mr. RITCHIE. James L. Ritchie.

Mr. COLEMAN. Will you raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear the
testimony you are about to give is the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you God?

Mr. RITCHIE. I do.

Mr. COLEMAN. Please state your name and address.

Mr. RITCHIE. James L. Ritchie, 5010 North 13th Street, Arlington, Va.

Mr. COLEMAN. Our information is, sir, that some time around October 22,
1963, you had occasion to look at the Oswald file----

Mr. RITCHIE. I did.

Mr. COLEMAN. After the Department received a telegram from the CIA
indicating that Oswald had made an inquiry at the Russian Embassy in
Mexico City, and that you took certain action as a result of looking at
the file?

Mr. RITCHIE. I did.

Mr. COLEMAN. And that is what we want to ask you about, sir. But before
I do that, let me ask you a few preliminary questions.

Mr. RITCHIE. Certainly.

Mr. COLEMAN. You have given your address, is that correct?

Mr. RITCHIE. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Where are you presently working?

Mr. RITCHIE. State Department Passport Office, Legal Division.

Mr. COLEMAN. And what is your position?

Mr. RITCHIE. Attorney advisor.

Mr. COLEMAN. And how long have you been in that capacity?

Mr. RITCHIE. Nine or ten years.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are you a member of the Bar?

Mr. RITCHIE. Yes; District of Columbia.

Mr. COLEMAN. When was the first time you ever heard the name Lee Harvey
Oswald?

Mr. RITCHIE. October 22, 1963.

Mr. COLEMAN. And would you indicate what occasioned your hearing the
name?

Mr. RITCHIE. The Security Division transmitted a telegram from the
CIA marked Secret, to the Passport Office. It was received in the
Legal Division October 16, and it had been marked "Mr. Anderson, pull
previous" which means get the file, and it was then handed to me
October 21, approximately.

Mr. COLEMAN. Who handed it to you?

Mr. RITCHIE. I don't know. It was placed on my desk. I imagine the
file----

Mr. COLEMAN. Prior to that time, you hadn't called for the file? You
knew nothing about the case?

Mr. RITCHIE. No; I knew nothing about it. It had been placed on my desk
for review. I read the telegram, noted that copies had been sent to
SCA, that is the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs, CMA, Mexico,
the Soviet desk, and the press section of RAR.

Mr. SEELEY. American Republics Political Division.

Mr. COLEMAN. Then what did you do after you got the telegram?

Mr. RITCHIE. I reviewed the entire file.

Mr. COLEMAN. That means you read every document in the file?

Mr. RITCHIE. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. And do you have any idea how long it took you?

Mr. RITCHIE. Not more than a half hour.

Mr. COLEMAN. And then what did you do after you read or reviewed the
file?

Mr. RITCHIE. I don't want to say I read every item. I read the majority.

Mr. COLEMAN. As a lawyer?

Mr. RITCHIE. Yes; I glanced over it.

Mr. COLEMAN. You read what you felt was relevant?

Mr. RITCHIE. Relevant.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you did thumb through every document?

Mr. RITCHIE. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. What did you then do?

Mr. RITCHIE. I made a judgment there was no passport action to be
taken, and marked the file to be filed.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you make a written memorandum?

Mr. RITCHIE. No, sir; just put "file" on it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you discuss it with Mr. Seeley or anyone else?

Mr. RITCHIE. I took the file to Mr. Seeley.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you summarize for him what was in the file?

Mr. RITCHIE. No; I did not. I don't know what my exact words were to
him. I must have said, "Look at this."

Mr. COLEMAN. Didn't you say to him, "This guy was a defector"?

Mr. RITCHIE. I don't recall what I said to him, back in October. I know
I said something to him. I directed his attention to it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Then did he discuss it with you?

Mr. RITCHIE. No.

Mr. COLEMAN. You put the file on his desk and you didn't have anything
to do with it?

Mr. RITCHIE. That is right.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why did you put it on his desk?

Mr. RITCHIE. He was in charge of the section, and I just brought it to
him for his attention.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you do that with every file that you are asked to
review?

Mr. RITCHIE. Those files that I thought should be brought to his
attention; yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, you felt that this file was other than just
the routine file that you would look at and put back?

Mr. RITCHIE. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Wouldn't you tell Mr. Seeley something as to why you
thought it was other than routine?

Mr. RITCHIE. No, sir; I just said "Look at it." I presume I just
directed his attention to the file, and that he should look at it.

Mr. COLEMAN. And then you had no more discussion with him?

Mr. RITCHIE. None that I can recall.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you say anything to him, like for example, "This guy
the last time he was abroad tried to, or at least threatened that he
would give to the Soviets whatever he had learned in the Marine Corps
with reference to our radar information"?

Mr. RITCHIE. I have no recollection of my conversation with Mr. Seeley.
All I know is my usual procedure is I review a case. If there is no
passport action to be taken, I place it, mark it "file" and place it in
the box to go to file.

Mr. COLEMAN. Without Mr. Seeley taking a look at it?

Mr. RITCHIE. Without Mr. Seeley ever seeing it.

Mr. COLEMAN. And this one you felt----

Mr. RITCHIE. And this one I felt he should see.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you didn't give him any memorandum----

Mr. RITCHIE. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Or point out what he should look at?

Mr. RITCHIE. I may have directed his attention to the case, but I have
no independent recollection of it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Then after October 22, 1963, you had no contact with
Oswald, the file or anything else?

Mr. RITCHIE. No, sir; let me change that. I reviewed the file before I
came here. I have reviewed the file.

Mr. COLEMAN. Oh, sure.

That is all. Thank you, sir.



TESTIMONY OF CARROLL HAMILTON SEELEY, JR.

The testimony of Carroll Hamilton Seeley, Jr., was taken at 11 a.m., on
June 17, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Messrs.
William T. Coleman, Jr., and W. David Slawson, assistant counsel of the
President's Commission. Thomas Ehrlich, Esq., Special Assistant to the
Legal Adviser, Department of State, and James L. Ritchie, were present.


Mr. COLEMAN. Would you state your full name, please, sir?

Mr. SEELEY. Carroll Hamilton Seeley, Jr.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you raise your right hand, please?

Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give in this
deposition is the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?

Mr. SEELEY. I do.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I would like to state that you have been called and
asked to give a deposition because in looking through certain files
supplied us by the State Department, there are indications that you
had something to do with one or more of the documents in the file, and
we also want to ask you concerning what you did after you received
information that a person named Lee Harvey Oswald was at the Soviet
Embassy in Mexico City some time around the first of October. As we
understand it you received such notice on or about the 16th of October.

Mr. SEELEY. I did see the notice. I think that I saw that notice on the
22d, on October 22, 1963.

Mr. COLEMAN. Those are the two subjects that we are going to question
you about.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you state your address for the record?

Mr. SEELEY. My address is 6944 Nashville Road, Lanham, Md.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are you familiar with the congressional resolution in re
this Commission?

Mr. SEELEY. I am familiar with the newspaper accounts.

Mr. COLEMAN. You are familiar with the resolution?

Mr. SEELEY. I am familiar with it to the extent that I have read in
the newspapers that there is a Commission set up to investigate the
assassination.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you state whether you are presently employed by the
Federal Government?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I am. I am employed with the Department of State.

Mr. COLEMAN. What is your position with the State Department?

Mr. SEELEY. I am Assistant Chief of the Legal Division of the Passport
Office of the Department of State.

Mr. COLEMAN. Who is your immediate superior?

Mr. SEELEY. Robert D. Johnson, chief counsel.

Mr. COLEMAN. How long have you had that position?

Mr. SEELEY. I have been in that position since approximately February
1962.

Mr. COLEMAN. Prior to February 1962, what was your position?

Mr. SEELEY. I was Chief of the Security Branch of the Legal Division of
the Passport Office.

Mr. COLEMAN. How long did you have that job?

Mr. SEELEY. I had held that job since approximately 1957.

Mr. COLEMAN. As assistant to Mr. Johnson----

Mr. SEELEY. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. What are your duties?

Mr. SEELEY. My duties are mainly supervisory and to review material
that has been prepared in the Passport Office Legal Division, and on
some occasions to clear information or material that has been prepared
in other divisions of the Passport Office.

Mr. COLEMAN. I take it you are a lawyer?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I am.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are you a member of the Bar?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I am.

Mr. COLEMAN. Of what State or States?

Mr. SEELEY. I am a member of the Bar of the District of Columbia.

Mr. COLEMAN. How long have you been with the Department of State?

Mr. SEELEY. I have been with the Department of State since 1954.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell me the first time you heard, read or saw
the name Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. SEELEY. Well, Mr. Coleman, I don't have an independent recollection
of that. I feel that probably the name first appears in the file on
March 28, 1961.

Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, by consulting the file, to refresh your
recollection, you think that the first time you heard or saw the name
Lee Harvey Oswald was in March 1961?

Mr. SEELEY. It is possible, it may have been that I had heard of it
before, though, because he did have some publicity, and I usually
follow those items, but I don't have any recollection of it.

Mr. COLEMAN. What happened in March 1961, that occasioned your knowing
or hearing the name Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. SEELEY. May I look at the file?

Mr. COLEMAN. Certainly.

I take it, sir, you are looking at the file which is the file of the
passport--the original passport file of the State Department.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. That is the file that has been given State Department file
No. X, is that correct?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

The first time my name appears in the file is on a form DS-10, which is
a reference slip, and it is addressed to Mr. Cacciatore in PT-F, and to
Mr. Seeley, in PT-LS.

It requests to know insofar as I am concerned, should instruction be
classified confidential.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I will mark for the purposes of this deposition a
document as S-1, meaning Seeley Exhibit No. 1, which is the State
Department document which already has been marked by the State
Department as X-45.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 1 for
identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Who is the reference slip dated March 28, 1961, from?

Mr. SEELEY. Mr. Kupiec.

Mr. COLEMAN. To two persons, and you are one of the two persons, Mr.
Seeley, is that correct?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you the document which has been marked as S-1 and
ask you is that a copy of the document you referred to?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that you got this because someone asked whether
the instructions should be classified as confidential.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir. I don't have an independent recollection of this,
but I assume that it is referring to this instruction which is State
Department's document X-47, which had been classified as Official Only.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I show you a document which has already been marked
as Commission Exhibit No. 969, and ask you whether these were the
instructions that were attached to S-1.

Mr. SEELEY. So far as I am able to determine, I don't have an
independent recollection, but looking at the formation of the file and
the fact that this was not sent, and I know that there was another one
that was sent, I believe it is the same document.

Mr. COLEMAN. And you were asked as to whether it should be classified
as confidential?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. What, if anything, did you do?

Mr. SEELEY. I don't know. I have no recollection of what action I took
on that particular aspect of it.

Mr. COLEMAN. You don't recall ever talking to Miss Waterman or anyone
else in the Department as to what form the proposed instruction should
take?

Mr. SEELEY. No. I don't know whether I even know Miss Waterman. I
know Mr. Kupiec, and I probably know Miss Waterman, but I don't have
recollection of what she looks like.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you ever discuss with Mr. Kupiec as to what form the
instruction should take?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir. This instruction was drafted by Miss Waterman,
and it was sent up for clearance to PTL, Mr. Johnson. I presume that
when it went to either Mr. Cacciatore or Mr. Kupiec, I put my name on
for the clearance procedure, in particular with regard to whether the
thing should have been classified, have a higher classification than it
did.

Mr. COLEMAN. You don't have any independent recollection of discussing
Oswald?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Or whether the instruction should have been in a different
form?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I do not.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell me the next occasion where you had anything
to do with Oswald, or the file?

Mr. SEELEY. The next occasion, I think, relates to document X-43.

Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to mark as S-2 a memorandum from Robert D.
Johnson to Mr. John T. White, under date of March 31, 1961, which in
the State Department files has been marked as X-43.

(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 2 for
identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Is that the document referred to?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; it is.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, sir, did you draft S-2?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. COLEMAN. Can you tell me the circumstances surrounding your
drafting S-2?

Mr. SEELEY. This particular item I do have a recollection of because
there was a discussion between Mr. Johnson and myself concerning the
propriety of sending the passport through the mail as had been proposed.

Mr. COLEMAN. What was that discussion?

Mr. SEELEY. We were opposed to this action on several grounds.

Mr. COLEMAN. What were they?

Mr. SEELEY. One was the fact that I think we already had information
that Mrs. Oswald, the mother, had not been able to get in touch with
her son.

Mr. COLEMAN. You are talking about Oswald's mother?

Mr. SEELEY. The mother; yes. And we felt that the mails shouldn't be
trusted for a U.S. passport which we know has a value outside the
United States.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, you also indicated in the memorandum that, "We should
not be bound by the opinion he expressed in paragraph 2 of his letter
set out in Moscow Despatch No. 985 of February 28, 1961."

Mr. SEELEY. May I get that? It is No. 585. The paragraph that we are
referring to reads: "I desire to return to the United States, that is
if we could come to some agreement concerning the dropping of any legal
proceedings against me. If so, then I would be free to ask the Russian
authorities to allow me to leave. If I could show them my American
passport, I am of the opinion they would give me an exit visa."

The item in the memorandum concerns itself mainly with his request for
agreement concerning the dropping of any legal proceedings against him.

Mr. COLEMAN. You indicated that the Department ought not to give such
agreement.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have any discussions with Mr. Johnson with respect
to this March 31, 1961, memorandum?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir. I don't have a complete recollection of it, but
I do know that I did discuss this particular item, particularly the
mailing of the passport, with Mr. Johnson.

Mr. COLEMAN. And do you recall what Mr. Johnson said?

Mr. SEELEY. I think Mr. Johnson was the one that instructed me to draft
this so that we would not send this through the mail, so that the
passport would not be sent through the mail.

Mr. COLEMAN. After the memorandum of March 31, 1961, and this
discussion you had with Mr. Johnson, what did you do?

Mr. SEELEY. I am sorry?

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you draft the instructions in the form that they
actually went forward?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything to do with that?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; except I think there is a clearance, but I am not
sure about that. I think we cleared it.

Mr. COLEMAN. And the instructions that actually went forward did
indicate that they ought not to return the passport by mail?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. What was the date of that instruction?

Mr. SEELEY. The instruction that went forward?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.

Mr. SEELEY. That was AE-173, of April 13, 1961. It is Department X-38.

Mr. COLEMAN. Will the record show that that document has already been
marked as Commission Exhibit No. 971 before the Commission. You say
that you read Commission Exhibit No. 971 and cleared it before it went
forward?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Exhibit No. 971 which you referred to as X-38 shows on the
left-hand side that there is a notation that a copy of the instructions
was sent to the CIA.

Mr. SEELEY. Was furnished to the CIA.

Mr. COLEMAN. Was that done at the same time the instructions went
forward?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything to do with sending it to the CIA?

Mr. SEELEY. I don't have a recollection on this. I would imagine what
happened is that there was a request by the CIA for a copy of this, and
that I authorized them to be furnished a copy on October 5, 1961.

Mr. COLEMAN. I take it you actually read the instructions which went
forward on April 13, 1961.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir. My initials are at the bottom.

Mr. COLEMAN. The fact that your initials are at the bottom indicates
that you approved them?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. What was the next occasion on which you had anything to do
with the Oswald file or heard the name Oswald?

Mr. SEELEY. I will have to check the file. The next occasion where the
record shows that I had something to do with the Oswald file concerns
Item X-31. It is a Department of State instruction, W-7, dated July
11, 1961, drafted by Mrs. Waterman, and I cleared this particular
instruction.

Mr. COLEMAN. Can we note for the record that that instruction has
already been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 975?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. You cleared those instructions prior to the time you
received word from Mr. Snyder in the Embassy in Moscow that Oswald had
appeared at the Embassy on July 8, 10, or 11?

Mr. SEELEY. Of 1961?

Mr. COLEMAN. 1961.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; that is true. I wasn't sure of the time element
in there, but that is true. This went out the same day, apparently,
that the instruction was drafted and was sent in, or the despatch was
drafted and sent in.

Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, you took that action or you approved that
action prior to the time that you knew that Oswald had appeared at the
Embassy in Moscow?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Is it a fair reading of the July 11, 1961, instructions
which you approved, that you indicated that Oswald could be given back
his passport?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I don't think so. I call your attention to
paragraph 5 of the despatch; "It is noted that the Embassy intends
to seek the Department's prior advice before granting Mr. Oswald
documentation as a United States citizen upon any application he may
submit."

Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, as of this time it was still open as far as
the Department was concerned in Washington whether Oswald had renounced
his citizenship and was entitled to a passport?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir. I don't think that the adjudicative proceeding
had been completed.

Mr. COLEMAN. When was the adjudicative process completed so far as you
were concerned, that the Passport Office in Washington determined that
in its opinion, that Mr. Oswald was still a citizen?

Mr. SEELEY. I would say that the operations memorandum of August 18,
1961, from the Department of State to the American Embassy in Moscow
which refers to the Embassy Despatch No. 29, the passport renewal
application and the questionnaire.

Mr. COLEMAN. You would say that as of that date the Passport Office
determined that Oswald was still a citizen?

Mr. SEELEY. I would say at that date that we concurred in the
conclusion of the Embassy that he had not expatriated--that we had no
information or evidence that he had expatriated himself.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything to do with this decision?

Mr. SEELEY. Not the citizenship decision; no, sir. I had nothing to do
with that.

Mr. COLEMAN. You weren't consulted prior to the time the decision was
made?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you approve the operations memorandum of August 18?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. 1961; before it was sent forward?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I did. My initials are at the bottom there.

Mr. COLEMAN. If you had disapproved it, at least there would have been
further discussion?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; there would have been.

Mr. COLEMAN. So, to that extent, you did have something to do with the
decision?

Mr. SEELEY. Well, to that extent, there was no consultation. This
was sent up for clearance, and insofar as the citizenship angle was
concerned, I agreed with what they had done.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you call for and look at the file prior to the time
you initialed the operations memorandum of August 18, 1961?

Mr. SEELEY. I would presume that I had the whole file. Mr. Ehrlich has
suggested that I mention that I was not in the citizenship area at the
time that I put my concurrence on this operations memorandum, and I was
looking at it only from the aspect of my own area.

Mr. COLEMAN. What was your area?

Mr. SEELEY. I was in the Security Branch. I was Chief of the Security
Branch of the Legal Division.

Mr. COLEMAN. What did you have to do with the decision?

Mr. SEELEY. In this particular case if you had objected, I am sure that
there would have been further discussion on this particular case.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could we mark as Seeley Exhibit No. 3--instead of "S"
I think we had better call these Seeley exhibits, the operations
memorandum dated August 18, 1961, from the Department of State to the
American Embassy.

Mr. SEELEY. Fine, sir.

(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 3 for
identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. That is the document that you referred to as X-27, is that
correct?

Mr. SEELEY. X-27, that is correct.

Mr. COLEMAN. If you had felt that there was evidence in the file that
Oswald had renounced his citizenship, I take it you would not have
approved this memorandum, is that correct?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I would not have.

Mr. COLEMAN. You would not have approved it?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I would not have approved it.

Mr. COLEMAN. There would have been further discussions?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, as far as you were concerned in reviewing
the file and what you knew and looking over it, what Miss Waterman had
said and what Mr. Snyder had said, that your decision was that you saw
no reason why you would disagree with the decision?

Mr. SEELEY. I was in complete agreement with the decision.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you concurred in the operations memorandum of
August 18, 1961, what was the next occasion on which you had anything
to do with the Oswald file?

Mr. SEELEY. So far as I can determine----

Mr. COLEMAN. The Commission Exhibit No. 979 is the same as I have
marked as Seeley Exhibit No. 3.

Mr. SEELEY. So far as I can determine by examination of the file, the
next contact I had with the file concerns a slip that is part of State
X-19, consisting of a DS-10 reference slip dated 12-29-61.

Mr. COLEMAN. That is attached to a letter from L. A. Mack, to the
Director of the Passport Office of the State Department, is that
correct?

Mr. SEELEY. Mr. Coleman, on that particular item, I don't think that
that was what it was attached to. I think it was probably attached to
X-20.

Mr. COLEMAN. What is that?

Mr. SEELEY. That is a memorandum from Miss Knight to Mr. Boswell.

Mr. COLEMAN. Will you read that memorandum into the record? It is short.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes; the subject is: "Lee Harvey Oswald." It is classified
"Confidential."

It states: "We refer to the Office Memorandum of July 27, 1961, from
SY, which stated that 'renounced United States citizenship.' Mr. Oswald
attempted to renounce United States citizenship but did not in fact
renounce United States citizenship. Our determination on the basis of
the information and evidence presently of record is that Mr. Oswald did
not expatriate himself, and remains a citizen of the United States."

Mr. COLEMAN. You say that your reference slip of 12-29-61 was attached
to that memorandum?

Mr. SEELEY. I would presume it was.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you look at the letter, the Mack letter from the
Immigration and Naturalization Service to the Director of Passports?

Mr. SEELEY. I am looking at it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you see that letter or did you have anything to do
with that letter?

Mr. SEELEY. So far as I know, I had nothing to do with that letter. I
have seen the letter.

Mr. COLEMAN. By the time you did, the reference slip of 12-29-61--which
I would like the reporter to indicate was marked Seeley Exhibit No.
4--what was your job in the State Department?

(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 4 for
identification.)

Mr. SEELEY. At the time that I--I was still Chief of the Security
Branch of the Legal Division.

Mr. COLEMAN. What does PT-L mean?

Mr. SEELEY. PT-L, Passport-Legal, PT-LS, Passport-Legal Security.

To give you an idea about it, the Legal Division is divided into two
branches, and we have a short designation for it, PT-LS and PT-LAD.

Mr. COLEMAN. I see.

Mr. SEELEY. I will tell you further if you wish, about this particular
item. This was----

Mr. COLEMAN. What is this particular item? You are now talking about
the letter?

Mr. SEELEY. The letter; yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. It is the Mack letter?

Mr. SEELEY. State Department File X-19. It was addressed to our Liaison
Branch, and I see at the bottom it was reviewed by Mr. Reichman, of the
Immigration and Naturalization Service. And I would presume that I did
not, that this was not in the file at the time that this DS-10, that it
was probably in Liaison, and the file was called for. It was reviewed.
The file was then reviewed by Mr. Reichman who answered for his own
service.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, sir; what was the next occasion on which you had
anything to do with the Oswald file?

Mr. SEELEY. The next occasion concerns Item X-11.

Mr. COLEMAN. We have marked as Seeley Deposition Exhibit No. 5 a
memorandum from Robert Owen, to Michael Cieplinski, dated March 23,
1962.

(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 5 for
identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. I ask you, sir; whether that is the document you refer to.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you draft Seeley Exhibit No. 5?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. You reviewed it?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; on March 28, 1962.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything to do with Seeley Exhibit No. 5
other than the fact that you just read it?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why would you be reading it?

Mr. SEELEY. The item was referred to, a copy of this item was referred
to Miss Knight. It was, in turn, referred to the Legal Division, and
then in turn referred to the Security Branch of the Legal Division.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you take any action with respect to it?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I did not, other than to note that I had read it
and initialed it.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did the fact that he had originally stated that he had
information as a radar operator in the Marine Corps which he would make
available to the Soviet Union--did that in any way raise in your mind a
security problem?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I thought that this certainly raised a doubt. He
had originally, I think, way back had made some similar type statement.
Here he made the statement, "Oswald stated he had never in fact been
subjected to any questioning or briefing by the Soviet authorities
concerning his life or experiences prior to entering the Soviet Union,
and never provided such information to any Soviet organ." I thought
that certainly there were two statements by him.

Mr. COLEMAN. I note on the copy you have there is a red check right
beside the line which I read. Did you place that red check on there?

Mr. SEELEY. I don't think so, sir. It looks like--I think I had a
regular pencil, and I think I would have done it with a pencil.

Mr. COLEMAN. Merely because a person who had attempted to defect now
says when he is trying to get back into the country, "I really didn't
tell the Soviets anything," that wouldn't completely satisfy you that
maybe he hadn't, would it?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; but I had no information that he had in fact done
so. He had just made a statement that he would. I think that was his
original statement.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you didn't do anything other than read Seeley Exhibit
No. 5?

Mr. SEELEY. That is right, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. When was the next occasion you had anything to do with the
file?

Mr. SEELEY. The next concerns Item X-7, which is a memorandum from
Robert D. Johnson to William O. Boswell, dated May 4, 1962.

Mr. COLEMAN. We have marked that as Seeley Exhibit No. 6, and
identified as a memorandum from Robert D. Johnson to William O.
Boswell, dated May 4, 1962.

(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 6 for
identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you draft this memorandum?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. What did you have to do with it? You just read it?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I signed it in Mr. Johnson's stead, to send it on
its way to Mr. Boswell.

Mr. COLEMAN. In effect, you said that based upon the evidence and
information of record, that Oswald had not expatriated himself under
the pertinent laws of the United States?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you review the file before you wrote that memorandum?

Mr. SEELEY. I didn't write the memorandum. Before I signed it?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.

Mr. SEELEY. I don't have any recollection of it. I presume the file was
with the memorandum. That is in the normal course of business, that
would be the way it was handled.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you don't have any independent recollection of whether
you checked through the file to see whether----

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I do not.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell me who wrote the memorandum from looking at
the initials?

Mr. SEELEY. I think it was a Mrs. Abboud.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you discuss it with her before?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I did not. This came from the citizenship area.
She is in the citizenship area.

Mr. COLEMAN. If they prepare a memorandum for your signature, just
merely because somebody in the citizenship area drafts it doesn't mean
that you sign it, does it?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; it does not. I would imagine, although I don't
have any recollection, that I did look into the file.

Mr. COLEMAN. Is it fair to say that you would not just initial it
merely because somebody else had drafted it?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. And normally you would look through the file?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; in the normal course of business I would look at
the file--see what my own conclusion was.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you drafted or after you initialed the memorandum
which has been marked as Seeley Exhibit No. 6, what was the next
occasion you had to look at the Oswald file?

Mr. SEELEY. The next occasion concerned the two items that are
identified as X-5.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could we mark as Seeley Exhibit No. 7 a photostatic copy
of an article which appeared in the Washington Post on Saturday, June
9, 1962, and also attached is a reference slip.

(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 7 for
identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Are they the two items that you refer to?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; they are.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, I take it you just read this and put it in the file.

Mr. SEELEY. I would presume that I cut this article out. I see that it
is my printing on the side there where it says "Oswald, Lee Harvey" on
the right-hand side.

Mr. COLEMAN. That is your printing?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; and I would presume that I saw the article in the
newspaper, cut it out and brought it to be filed with this case.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I show you a sheet which has the word "Refusal"
Commission Exhibit No. 962, and ask you whether that hand printing that
appears there is your printing, too?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; that is not. I have looked at that. It doesn't
look like mine.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, after you put this newspaper article in the file, did
you have anything else to do with the file?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes; I sent this item, this is CS, these items to our
Special Services, Miss Waters.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know what she did?

Mr. SEELEY. No; I don't. I have no recollection. I see that it was as
requested. It may have been a telephone request.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything else to do with the file?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. COLEMAN. What was that?

Mr. SEELEY. That was on October 22, 1963.

Mr. COLEMAN. What occasioned your looking at the file on October 22,
1963?

Mr. SEELEY. I am looking right now at State Department Exhibit X-3.

Mr. COLEMAN. And what occasioned your looking at the file on October
22, 1963?

Mr. SEELEY. It was the transmittal from INR of the Department
transmitting a secret--well, I know what it is, a CIA document,
telegram, to the Passport Office.

Mr. COLEMAN. Can you recall what the CIA telegram said?

Mr. SEELEY. The telegram said in effect that Lee Oswald had appeared
or had contacted, I believe was the word, the Soviet Embassy in Mexico
City in October 1963.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, did the telegram also indicate that Oswald was the
person who in 1959 had attempted to defect?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, when you got the telegram on your desk, did you also
get the file with it?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; the passport file.

Mr. COLEMAN. That came to you at the same time, or did you get the
telegram and then send for the file?

Mr. SEELEY. I had the whole thing. I am morally certain on this, that
I had the whole file. I can tell by the reconstruction on this. Mr.
Ritchie and myself have discussed this. We are both sure how this went
about.

Do you want me to give this reconstruction?

Mr. COLEMAN. You can, if you wish to; yes.

Mr. SEELEY. I notice that there was a little note. "Mr. Anderson pull
previous." "Previous" means to pull the file, whatever file there is.
This was on October 17. The file was pulled according to our records in
our office on October 17 or 18, I forget the exact date. It was within
a day or so thereafter this. And I presume that this was first reviewed
by Mr. Ritchie and then reviewed by myself.

Mr. COLEMAN. When you pulled the file which is the State Department
file X----

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you send for the security file?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why wouldn't you send for the security file if you get
a telegram from a security agency saying that the gentleman who was
down at the Russian Embassy in Mexico City is the same guy who in 1959
attempted to defect?

Mr. SEELEY. I looked at this report strictly from a passport office
point of view. The significance which, of course, might have great
intelligence significance, had little or no significance insofar as any
action that we would take in the Passport Office is concerned.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why would that be, sir?

Mr. SEELEY. Well, we have to have some basis under our regulations to
take any action.

Mr. COLEMAN. I mean why, if you get information which you can
immediately realize may have intelligence significance, why wouldn't
you look at it from a point of view of intelligence?

Mr. SEELEY. Well, I am working for the Passport Office. Certainly, if
I saw something that I could do something about, I would take whatever
action I thought was necessary.

Mr. COLEMAN. Why didn't you, for example, write a letter to the FBI
saying that this fellow is down in Mexico City, are you interested, or
do you want to see the file?

Mr. SEELEY. Well, I would say the probability is that a copy of this
was apparently furnished to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. COLEMAN. And you noted that, I take it, at the time of reviewing
the file?

Mr. SEELEY. I have no independent recollection that I did.

Mr. COLEMAN. But the fair assumption is that you did?

Mr. SEELEY. I would assume that.

Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that is also the reason why you didn't notify
the CIA, because the telegram had come from the CIA?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes; from the CIA.

Mr. COLEMAN. When you looked at the file, did you know or were you
aware after looking at the file that Oswald in June 1963 had been
issued a passport?

Mr. SEELEY. I presume I was. The passport is the next item there, and I
am sure that I looked at it and saw that he did have a passport.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you after you looked at it say to yourself "can we
revoke this passport?"

Mr. SEELEY. I am sure that is why I looked at it. I am sure of that,
Mr. Coleman, that I looked at it with that view in mind, if there was
any action to be taken of that sort.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you know that he had defected or attempted to defect
in 1959?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you know that when he attempted to defect that he
had indicated that he was going to pass some radar information to the
Russians if they gave him citizenship?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you know that the Soviet desk had indicated in 1961 or
1962 that it would be to the interests of the United States to get him
out of Russia and back to the United States?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you note in his passport application for his 1963
passport that he indicated that one of the countries that he intended
to travel to was Russia?

Mr. SEELEY. I don't have an independent recollection of that. I presume
I did note that.

Mr. COLEMAN. And you are saying with all that information that you
would look at that file, I take it you did it on October 22?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Read it and just put it back and did nothing about it?

Mr. SEELEY. I did nothing about it other than to note the fact that I
had read the telegram.

Mr. COLEMAN. All I am saying, just asking for your best recollection----

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I realize you did nothing, but wouldn't that cause you
to at least do something, to talk to somebody and say, "Can we do
something about this?"

Mr. SEELEY. Mr. Ritchie and I undoubtedly talked about this, or at
least we both saw it. I was well aware of the file. But there was
no particular passport significance to the fact that a man shows up
down at the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. He was married to a Soviet
citizen. I think there is an indication somewhere she was supposed to
report or something. I don't know what the score was on that.

Mr. COLEMAN. But the problem is, sir, that----

Mr. SEELEY. But even if she was to report, I don't get the significance
of an individual appearing at a Soviet Embassy, either here or anywhere
else in the world, by itself meaning anything insofar as passports is
concerned.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, the problem is, if there is a problem, that on
June 24, 1963, when Mr. Oswald applied for his passport, the State
Department issued it routinely because under the lookout system there
was nothing on Oswald, so, therefore, it went out the next day.

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. And we think, from what we know, that as of June 24 or 25
no one looked at the file, so, therefore, there is no reason why the
passport wouldn't go out.

Mr. SEELEY. I would presume from looking at this file, that that is
absolutely correct.

Mr. COLEMAN. But our problem is that if on June 24 or June 25 someone
had looked at the file, would you have issued the passport based upon
what was in the file as of June 24 or 25, or would you have at least
talked to people to see whether some action should be taken?

Mr. SEELEY. If I had seen this application on June 24 or 25, before it
had been issued, I think I probably would have discussed it. But that
would have been the end of it. We have no basis upon which to deny him
or hold up his passport. There would have been a discussion.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are you saying, then, it is your opinion that after
reviewing the file that if the request for a passport had come in and
you had looked at the file before the passport was issued, there was no
regulation or legal basis on which you could refuse him a passport?

Mr. SEELEY. That is correct. That is absolutely correct.

Mr. COLEMAN. And, therefore, I take it then, that the only additional
information you got in the October CIA telegram was that he was in
Mexico City, and he had visited the Russian Embassy in Mexico City.

Mr. SEELEY. That is correct.

Mr. COLEMAN. And it is your position that he had the right to go back
to Russia if he wanted to go anyway; is that correct?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. And so, therefore, there is nothing that you could have
done about it?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you make any memorandum or any memoranda when you
looked at the file in October 1963?

Mr. SEELEY. Aside from this notation which is in my handwriting, which
says "Noted CHS 10-22-63" that is the extent of the documentation that
I gave to them.

Mr. COLEMAN. But you do say you had some discussions with the other
gentlemen that looked at the file?

Mr. SEELEY. I don't have a recollection. I don't know whether Mr.
Ritchie does. I don't believe he does either, but the fact that we both
had it, he may have passed it to me. You have to get this in context.
We have hundreds of these cases. This is one case out of hundreds.

I am surprised that I have got any recollection, but I do have some,
as I mentioned before in my testimony here, that I did have some
recollection of it.

Mr. COLEMAN. No one called you and said, "Well, look, let him have the
passport, don't do anything about it," I take it?

Mr. SEELEY. Oh, no, sir. At the time the passport was issued, it was
issued.

Mr. COLEMAN. But I mean when you got the telegram, nobody called you
and said, "Look, just skip it. Let him have the passport."

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. "Don't do anything about it"?

Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. All the action you took, you took independently?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; as my own independent action.

Mr. COLEMAN. I take it if faced with the situation again, knowing only
what you knew on October 22, 1963, you would take the same action today?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; that is correct. There is one additional item,
and that is under our new regulations we do put a card in on a defector
or a person--I think I can give you the definition here.

"Defectors, expatriates and repatriates whose activities or background
demand further inquiry prior to issuance of passport facilities."

I presume that under this criteria, in fact I know under this criteria
that Oswald would have a card placed against him today.

Mr. COLEMAN. Is it your opinion as assistant legal counsel to the
Passport Office that you still in the final analysis couldn't deny him
the passport?

Mr. SEELEY. That is definite.

Mr. COLEMAN. And you would have to give it to him?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Has there been any other case of a defector where you have
actually issued him another passport?

Mr. SEELEY. We have issued passports to defectors, at least one that I
know of, and I think we have furnished a report on that.

Mr. COLEMAN. You say there is a case of another defector?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; in connection with the answer to this question,
we did a research job on a list of defectors which had been furnished
to the Department of State by the Department of Defense, and our search
disclosed that only one of these individuals, a Paul David Wilson, had
applied for passport facilities since his return to the United States,
and he was issued a passport.

Mr. COLEMAN. To go where, sir?

Mr. SEELEY. To visit Mexico, Colombia, South America, and was uncertain
of others.

Mr. COLEMAN. Was that done routinely or was that done after looking at
his file?

Mr. SEELEY. My recollection of this, that this was a routine issuance
of a passport to a person on whom we had no information.

Mr. COLEMAN. In other words, this was another case where because you
didn't have a lookout card----

Mr. SEELEY. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Nobody ever looked at the file?

Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; well, there was no file. We have no file on this
man other than his name. The Passport Office has no file on this man,
Paul David Wilson.

Mr. COLEMAN. But there has been no case where you had a file, you knew
he had defected, and then applied for another passport and before you
issued the second passport you had to make a decision as to whether you
could refuse to issue him a passport?

Mr. SEELEY. None to my knowledge.

Mr. COLEMAN. I have no further questions, unless you have something
else you would want to say.

Mr. SEELEY. I have nothing further, Mr. Coleman. I will be glad to help
all I can. That is all I can say.

Mr. COLEMAN. Thank you for coming over.



AFFIDAVIT OF LOUIS FELDSOTT

The following affidavit was executed by Louis Feldsott on July 23, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 _County of Rockland, ss_:

I, Louis Feldsott, being duly sworn say:

1. I am the President of Crescent Firearms, Inc., 2 West 37th Street,
New York 18, New York.

2. On November 22, 1963, the F.B.I. contacted me and asked if Crescent
Firearms, Inc., had any records concerning the sale of an Italian made
6.5 m/m rifle with the serial number C 2766.

3. I was able to find a record of the sale of this rifle which
indicated that the weapon had been sold to Kleins' Sporting Goods,
Inc., Chicago, Illinois on June 18, 1962. I conveyed this information
to the F.B.I. during the evening of November 22, 1963.

4. Further records involving the purchase, sale, and transportation of
the weapon have been turned over to the F.B.I.

Signed the 23d day of July 1964.

    (S) Louis Feldsott,
        LOUIS FELDSOTT.



AFFIDAVIT OF J. PHILIP LUX

The following affidavit was executed by J. Philip Lux on July 22, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Dallas, ss_:

I, J. Philip Lux, being duly sworn say:

1. I am now Store Manager at the H. L. Green Company, 1623 Main Street,
Dallas, Texas. I was not employed by the H. L. Green Company in 1963.

2. H. L. Green Company records show that in 1963, the Company had in
stock and sold Italian 6.5 mm rifles that were surpluses from World War
II.

3. The records also reflect the fact that the H. L. Green Company
received its supply of Italian 6.5 mm rifles from the Crescent Firearms
Company, New York City.

4. A review of the records has failed to reflect any record of a 6.5 mm
rifle with Serial No. C2766.

5. As far as I know, the H. L. Green Company is the only company in
Dallas handling any quantity of these Italian 6.5 mm rifles.

Signed the 22d day of July 1964.

    (S) J. Philip Lux,
        J. PHILIP LUX.



AFFIDAVIT OF HOWARD LESLIE BRENNAN

The following affidavit was executed by Howard Leslie Brennan on May 7,
1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Dallas, ss_:

I, Howard Leslie Brennan, being first duly sworn, do upon oath depose
and state:

On or about March 24, 1964, I testified in Washington, D.C., before
the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy.
In that connection I testified as to the reasons why I declined on
November 22, 1963, to give positive identification of Lee Harvey Oswald
as the man I saw firing a rifle from the southeast corner of the sixth
floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building on November 22, 1963.

Included in these reasons at pages 3629 and 3630 of Volume 28 of the
transcript of the Commission proceedings are the following reasons:

"And then I felt that my family could be in danger, and I, myself,
might be in danger. And since they already had the man for murder, that
he wasn't going to be set free to escape and get out of the country
immediately, and I could very easily sooner than the FBI or the Secret
Service wanted me, my testimony in, I could very easily get in touch
with them, if they didn't get in touch with me, and to see that the man
didn't get loose."

"... "Because I had already more or less give a detailed description of
the man, and I talked to the Secret Service and gave them my statement,
and they had convinced me that it would be strictly confidential and
all that. But still I felt like if I was the only eye witness, that
anything could happen to me or my family."

I have also been advised that on page 3595 of Volume 28 of the
transcript of the Commission proceedings, the following appears:

"Mr. BELIN. What do you mean by security reasons for your family, and
yourself?

"Mr. BRENNAN. I believe at that time, and I still believe it was a
Communist activity, and I felt like there had been more than one eye
witness, and if it got to be a known fact that I was an eye witness,
my family or I, either one, might not be safe."

I hereby state that this is a court reporter's error and that in truth
and in fact my answer to the question was:

"Mr. BRENNAN: I believe at that time, and I still believe it was a
Communist activity, and I felt like there _hadn't_ been more than
one eye witness, and if it got to be a known fact that I was an eye
witness, my family or I, either one, might not be safe."

Signed the 7th day of May 1964.

    (S) Howard Leslie Brennan.
        HOWARD LESLIE BRENNAN.



AFFIDAVIT OF ALBERT C. YEARGAN, JR.

The following affidavit was executed by Albert C. Yeargan, Jr., on July
21, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Dallas, ss_:

I, Albert C. Yeargan, Jr., 1922 Mayflower Drive, Dallas, Texas, being
duly sworn say:

1. I was the Sporting Goods Department Manager at the H. L. Green
Company, 1623 Main Street, Dallas, Texas, from the Summer of 1963 until
March 13, 1964. I am now employed by Smitty's Sporting Goods, 111 West
Jefferson Avenue, Dallas, Texas.

2. When I worked for the H. L. Green Company, it had in stock and was
offering for sale a large number of Italian 6.5 mm rifles that were
surpluses from World War II.

3. On November 22, 1963, FBI Agents, Secret Service Agents, and I
examined all sales records and receipt records concerning Italian 6.5
mm rifles.

4. The records showed that the H. L. Green Company obtained its supply
of these Italian 6.5 mm rifles from the Crescent Firearms Company in
New York City.

5. A review of all of the records failed to reflect any record of sale
of a 6.5 mm rifle with the Serial Number C2766.

6. As far as I know, the H. L. Green Company was at that time the only
Company in Dallas that handled any quantity of these Italian 6.5 mm
rifles.

Signed the 21st day of July 1964.

    (S) Albert C. Yeargan, Jr.,
        ALBERT C. YEARGAN, Jr.



AFFIDAVIT OF LOUIS WEINSTOCK

The following affidavit was executed by Louis Weinstock on May 20, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 _County of New York, ss_:

Louis Weinstock, being duly sworn, says:

1. On or about December 19, 1962, I was General Manager of "The
Worker," the address of which is 23 West 26 Street. New York 11, New
York. On or about December 19, 1962, I wrote the attached letter on the
letterhead of "The Worker" addressed to Lee Harvey Oswald, Post Office
Box 2915, Dallas, Texas, and sent or caused such letter to be sent to
Mr. Oswald. I have initialed that letter immediately below the initials
"WJL" appearing thereon for the purpose of identifying it as Weinstock
Exhibit No. 1.

2. The letter refers to certain "blow ups" which were apparently sent
to "The Worker" by Mr. Oswald. I described those "blow ups" in my
letter as "poster like blow ups" and indicated that they would be "most
useful at newsstands and other public places to call the attention of
newspaper readers that 'The Worker' is available."

3. While my recollection is not entirely clear concerning the nature
of the "blow ups" which Oswald had apparently sent to "The Worker," it
appears from the description of such "blow ups" in my letter that they
must have consisted of the item which has been marked as Exhibit 5A in
the deposition of Mr. Arnold S. Johnson, which Exhibit, as indicated in
Mr. Johnson's testimony, was obtained from the files of "The Worker"
and turned over to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by Mr. Johnson's
counsel.

4. Aside from the attached letter of December 19, 1962. I know of no
other correspondence which I may have written to Lee Harvey Oswald and
I do not recall receiving anything from him other than the material
described in this affidavit.

Signed the 20th day of May 1964.

    (S) Louis Weinstock,
        LOUIS WEINSTOCK.



AFFIDAVIT OF VINCENT T. LEE

The following affidavit was executed by Vincent T. Lee on May 20, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 _County of New York, ss_:

Vincent T. Lee, being duly sworn says:

1. My name is Vincent T. Lee. I reside at 37-1/2 St. Mark's Place, New
York, New York. I was formerly the National Director for the Fair Play
for Cuba Committee. I make this affidavit to supplement the testimony
which I gave to the above Commission on April 17, 1964.

2. I have examined the attached membership card of the Fair Play for
Cuba Committee and state that it is an authentic membership card of
that organization and that it bears my signature.[B]

3. I sent that card or caused it to be sent to Lee Harvey Oswald on or
about May 29, 1963.

4. I have initialed the attached card under the initials WJL which
appear on the card for the purposes of identification of that card in
the record of the proceedings of the above Commission.

Signed the 20th day of May 1964.

    (S) Vincent T. Lee,
        VINCENT T. LEE.

    [B] The FPCC membership card referred to in the above affidavit
        is Commission Exhibit No. 828.



AFFIDAVIT OF FARRELL DOBBS

The following affidavit was executed by Farrell Dobbs on June 4, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 _County of New York, ss_:

I, Farrell Dobbs, being duly sworn, depose and say:

1. I have read the twenty-six page transcript of the examination of me
in a proceeding of the Commission to Report upon the Assassination of
President John F. Kennedy, held at New York, N.Y., on April 17, 1964,
and find it accurate with the exception of the corrections noted and
initialled by me on pages 1, 6, & 7.

2. I have read the original of a letter dated November 5, 1962, to Mr.
Lee H. Oswald from Farrell Dobbs, and have initialled it so that it may
be substituted as R. Watts Exhibit 11 for the typewritten copy shown me
on April 17, 1964.[C] I have no doubt that it is a letter I wrote, and
the signature is mine.

3. I have initialled the original of a letter dated December 9,
1962, to Mr. Lee H. Oswald, signed "Bob Chester," so that it may be
substituted as R. Watts Exhibit 12 for the typewritten copy shown me on
April 17, 1964.

4. As requested on pages 19-20, I have made a further search of our
files for the letter and reproductions from Lee H. Oswald referred to
in the Bob Chester letter but have found no record of them. Further,
I have discussed this matter with Mr. Chester and he advises me
that he has had a vague recollection that the reproductions were of
headlines from the _Militant_ but has no further recollection of any
correspondence with Lee H. Oswald.

5. As requested on page 21, I have made a further search for a copy of
R. Watts Exhibit 13 and for the letter and clipping referred to in it
as from Lee H. Oswald but have been unable to find any such material in
our files.

6. As requested in J. Lee Rankin's letter to Mr. Rowland Watts dated
May 20, 1964, I have made inquiry of the Young Socialist Alliance
and am advised that its files have been searched and that its
representatives have found no record that Lee H. Oswald's name was ever
referred to it, nor does it have any record of ever having had anything
in its files from, to, or concerning Lee H. Oswald.

7. In pursuance of the information supplied in Mr. Rankin's letter to
Mr. Watts dated May 20, 1964, I have made inquiry of _The Militant_
and have had its files further searched. There is no photograph of Lee
Harvey Oswald, with or without a rifle, in its files (other than a
clipping from the daily press after he was taken into custody). I am
confident no photograph of him was ever received prior to President
Kennedy's assassination.

8. To the best of my knowledge and belief, I have submitted to you
all of the material in the files of the Socialist Workers Party, _The
Militant_, and Pioneer Publishers, concerning Lee Harvey Oswald, and I
have no further material or information concerning him.

Signed the 4th day of June 1964.

    (S) Farrell Dobbs,
        FARRELL DOBBS.

    [C] Since all of the Rowland Watts Exhibits have been
        redesignated as Farrell Dobbs Exhibits, R. Watts Exhibits
        Nos. 11, 12, and 13 referred to in the above affidavit have
        been marked Farrell Dobbs Exhibits Nos. 11, 12, and 13,
        respectively.



AFFIDAVIT OF VIRGINIA GRAY

The following affidavit was executed by Virginia Gray on May 28, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
 _County of Durham, ss_:

Virginia Gray, being duly sworn says:

1. My name is Virginia Gray. I am the Assistant Curator of Manuscripts
of the Duke University Library, Durham, North Carolina, (the Library)
and the person most familiar with the records of the Socialist Party of
America which are now in the possession of the Library.

2. The records of the Library reflect that it purchased the original
official records of the Socialist Party of America covering the period
from 1900 to 1938 from Leon Kramer, a New York dealer in Leftist
literature. Since the time of that original purchase the Library has
become the unofficial repository for files of the Socialist Party
of America and periodically acquires the inactive records of that
organization.

3. On or about January 2, 1959 the Library acquired certain records
of the Socialist Party of America from Mr. Stephen Siteman, Executive
Secretary of that Party, 112 East 19th Street, New York, New York.

4. A letter dated October 3, 1956 addressed "Dear Sirs" from Lee Oswald
and an advertisement coupon of "The Socialist Call", photostatic copies
of which are attached to this affidavit, were found in those materials
while they were being processed by the Library.[D]

5. The Library has received additional materials from the Socialist
Party of America and is presently processing such materials. As of
the date of this affidavit, however, the only materials relating to
Lee Harvey Oswald which have been found amongst the records of the
Socialist Party of America presently in the possession of the Library
are those of which photostatic copies are attached.

Signed the 28th day of May 1964.

    (S) Virginia Gray,
        (Mrs.) VIRGINIA GRAY.

    [D] The photostatic copies referred to in the above affidavit
        have been marked Gray Exhibit No. 1.



AFFIDAVIT OF DR. ALBERT F. STAPLES

The following affidavit was executed by Dr. Albert F. Staples on May
26, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF TEXAS,
 _County of Dallas, ss_:

Dr. Albert F. Staples, being duly sworn says:

1. My name is Albert F. Staples. I reside at 6056 Ellsworth Street,
Dallas, Texas. I am a dentist at the Baylor University College of
Dentistry and am familiar with the records in possession of the College
relating to Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald.

2. I have caused a search of the files of the Baylor University College
of Dentistry which reveals a file on Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald. The
foregoing file is now in the possession of the deponent. To the best of
my knowledge this file contains the only papers relating to Mrs. Lee
Harvey Oswald in the possession or control of the Baylor University
College of Dentistry. Accordingly under my supervision photostatic
copies[E] have been made of this entire file, such copies being
attached to this affidavit.

3. On information and belief the attached photostatic copies are of the
entire file and comprise all the papers relating to Mrs. Lee Harvey
Oswald in the possession and control of the Baylor University Dental
Clinic.

Signed the 26th day of May 1964.

    (S) Dr. Albert F. Staples,
        Dr. ALBERT F. STAPLES.

    [E] The photostatic copies referred to in the above affidavit
        have been marked Staples Exhibit No. 1.



AFFIDAVIT OF KATHERINE MALLORY

The following affidavit was executed by Katherine Mallory on July 20,
1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 _County of Broome, ss_:

I, Katherine Mallory, 412 East Main Street, Endicott, New York, being
duly sworn say:

1. In 1961 I was a sophomore at the University of Michigan. In March of
1961, I was a member of the University of Michigan band which toured
Russia and the Near East.

2. We arrived in Minsk, U.S.S.R. from Moscow on March 10, 1961.
While in Minsk, the band gave some concerts at the Minsk Polytechnic
Institute. We stayed in a hotel in Minsk. We left Minsk on March 14 and
proceeded to Kiev, U.S.S.R.

3. There was an evening in Minsk when members of the band were divided
into small groups, each of which was assigned a Russian interpreter,
for the purpose of going on a tour of the facilities of the Minsk
Polytechnic Institute.

4. Near the conclusion of this tour, at about 10:00 p.m., when the band
members were boarding a bus, I became surrounded by Russian students
who were asking me questions. Although one student was interpreting I
was having difficulty communicating with them.

5. At this point, an American approached and offered to act as an
interpreter. I accepted the offer. While I never really had a chance
to talk with him, he mentioned that he was an ex-Marine from Texas.
Sometimes he spoke with a Texas accent and at other times he spoke with
an English accent. Somehow I got the impression that he was working in
Russia and that he never intended to return to the United States.

6. This American appeared well dressed. I think he wore a camel hair
coat and possibly a tie. He did not indicate if he had been at the
concert.

7. After just a few minutes of further questions from the Russian
students, with the American interpreting, I boarded the bus. I never
again saw nor heard from this individual. I noted in my diary something
about the incident, and I wrote that this American seemed to be a
crackpot. I did not meet any other Americans in Minsk.

8. I have seen pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald in the newspaper, and the
individual I saw in Minsk very much resembles Oswald as pictured. I
recall that the person I saw seemed to have more hair and was heavier
than Lee Harvey Oswald as pictured in the newspapers.

9. Except possibly for this one occasion in Minsk, I never saw nor
communicated with Lee Harvey Oswald.

Signed the 20th day of July 1964.

    (S) Katherine Mallory,
        KATHERINE MALLORY.



AFFIDAVIT OF KATHERINE MALLORY

The following affidavit was executed by Katherine Mallory on July 20,
1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 _County of Broome, ss_:

I, Katherine Mallory, 412 East Main Street, Endicott, New York, being
duly sworn say:

Following my telephone interview on July 10, 1964 with Mr. Richard
Mosk, I rechecked my diary of the University of Michigan Symphony Band
Tour and letters which I sent to my parents. Therefore, I append the
following minor corrections of statements in the interest of being as
accurate as I can.

Statements 3, 4, and 5. I made no mention of the tour of the Institute
and therefore cannot verify the details of the arrangement, i.e., small
groups. However, I recall that the tour preceded the talent show. The
following is a statement from my diary; "Tonight the students at the
Bilo (sic) Russian (White Russian) Polytechnic Institute put on a
talent show for us ... (description of performance).... Afterward Jerry
Anderson and I missed getting out with our crowd and we were mobbed
by the students. I met a boy from Texas (now a Russian citizen) who
translated questions and answers for me." In a letter to my parents
dated March 17, 1961, "The first night we were there, the students of
the Polytechnic Institute gave us a reception and put on a very nice
talent show. Afterwards, we all were mobbed by the students. I met a
young man probably about 26 who is from Texas but after the war he
became a citizen of Minsk. It was rather weird meeting an ex-American
but he did come in handy as an interpreter for me and the other
students I was talking to."

Statement 7. While I am sure that in conversations about this incident
I applied term "crackpot" I did not note it in my diary.

All other statements prepared on the basis of the telephone interview
are true.

Signed the 20th day of July 1964.

    (S) Katherine Mallory,
        KATHERINE MALLORY.



AFFIDAVIT OF MRS. MONICA KRAMER

The following affidavit was executed by Mrs. Monica Kramer on July 17,
1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
 _County of Santa Barbara, ss_:

I, Mrs. Monica Kramer, Janin Way, Sunny Acres, Solvang, California,
being duly sworn say:

1. In 1961, Miss Rita Naman and I took a trip to Europe which included
a visit to the Soviet Union. Miss. Naman had purchased a Singer
automobile in Great Britain and we drove through Europe and the Soviet
Union.

2. When we were in Moscow staying at the National Hotel, we met Mrs.
Marie Hyde, who, to the best of my knowledge, presently resides in
Port Angeles, Washington. Mrs. Hyde was desirous of driving with us to
Warsaw. Such an arrangement was made.

3. My travel notes indicate that we arrived in Minsk, U.S.S.R., on
August 10. After arriving at our hotel, we were asked to take a guided
tour of Minsk. We subsequently found out that after we left the hotel,
our bags had been searched. Out Intourist Guide's name was Svetlana.

4. We visited the Central Square where we stopped to take some
photographs. Kramer Exhibit 1, also labelled Commission No. 859d,
is a photograph taken by Miss Naman in Minsk on August 10, 1961. As
I recall, it was taken between 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. The building
in the background is the Palace of Culture, and the statue is one of
Joseph Stalin. The automobile in the center of the picture is the one
that was then owned by Miss Naman. The woman at the far left is the
Intourist Guide. She appears to be speaking with me, the woman standing
next to her. There are three men to the right of the automobile and a
small boy in front of it, all of whom I did not know.

5. On every occasion that we stopped while on the trip through Russia,
people would gather around the automobile and look at it. As a result,
we became accustomed to this and therefore paid little or no attention
to these people.

6. I cannot recall these three men. I never spoke with them. It now
appears to me that the man in the middle, wearing dark trousers and a
dark, short-sleeved plaid shirt, resembles Lee Harvey Oswald, whose
picture I have seen in the newspapers.

7. I recall that Miss Naman spoke with somebody in Minsk who spoke
English. They talked about records. I do not recall if this person was
Lee Harvey Oswald.

8. We left Minsk on August 11, 1961.

9. Except for possibly on August 10, 1961, I never met nor communicated
with Lee Harvey Oswald.

Signed the 17th day of July 1964.

    (S) Mrs. Monica Kramer,
        Mrs. MONICA KRAMER.



AFFIDAVIT OF RITA NAMAN

The following affidavit was executed by Rita Naman on July 17, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
 _County of Santa Barbara, ss_:

I, Rita Naman, Janin Way, Sunny Acres, Solvang, California, being duly
sworn say:

1. I am in the real estate business in Santa Ynez, California, and I
live with Mrs. Monica Kramer.

2. In 1961, Mrs. Kramer and I took a trip to Europe. I purchased an
automobile in England, and we drove it through Europe and the Soviet
Union.

3. While in Moscow we stayed at the National Hotel. There we met Mrs.
Marie Hyde, who, as far as I know, currently resides in Port Angeles,
Washington. We arranged to drive her to Warsaw, Poland.

4. All three of us left Moscow and travelled to Minsk, U. S. S. R.
We arrived there on August 10, 1961. After going to our hotel, I was
called by the Intourist Office and asked to go there. The official at
the Intourist Office wanted to know why I was in Russia. He appeared
hostile. I suspect that they were interested in me because in Moscow,
I had given a person who claimed to be a student a Newsweek Magazine
along with my business card. The official then insisted that Mrs.
Kramer, Mrs. Hyde, and I go on a tour of Minsk. When we returned to our
room after the tour, we found that our luggage had been searched.

5. Our Intourist guide's name was Svetlana. We visited the Central
Square where we stopped to take some photographs. Kramer Exhibit 1,
also labelled Commission No. 859 d, is a photograph taken by me at
this time. As I recall, it was taken about 8 or 8:30 p.m. The building
in the background is the Palace of Culture, and the statue is one of
Joseph Stalin. The automobile in the center of the picture was owned by
me. The woman at the far left is the Intourist Guide. She appears to be
speaking with a woman standing next to her, who is Mrs. Kramer. There
are three men to the right of the automobile and a small boy in front
of it, all of whom I did not know.

6. Kramer Exhibit No. 2, also labelled Commission No. 859c, is a
photograph taken by me at the same place and at about the same time;
however, I took this photograph with Mrs. Hyde's camera. In this
photograph Mrs. Hyde is at the far left with the Intourist Guide and
Mrs. Kramer. Only two men are pictured to the right of the car.

7. I do not remember speaking to any of the men pictured in Kramer
Exhibit 1 and in Kramer Exhibit 2. I was so disturbed by the earlier
interview with the Intourist Guide official, that I cannot remember
much of what happened thereafter.

8. I do recall that after this photograph was taken, I went to a nearby
record store. When I left the store, a man spoke to me in an American
accent and asked me about my car. He asked how many miles to the gallon
it travelled. I do not recall if this man was the same one pictured in
Kramer Exhibit 1 and in Kramer Exhibit 2.

9. The man appearing in these photographs, wearing dark trousers and a
dark, short-sleeved, check shirt, resembles Lee Harvey Oswald, whose
picture I have seen in the newspapers.

10. Except for possibly on August 10, 1961, I never met nor
communicated with Lee Harvey Oswald.

11. We left Minsk on August 11, 1961.

Signed the 17th day of July 1964.

    (S) Rita Naman,
        RITA NAMAN.



AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN BRYAN McFARLAND AND MERYL McFARLAND

The following affidavit was executed by John Bryan McFarland and Meryl
McFarland on May 28, 1964.


 AFFIDAVIT

 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

 GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND,
 _County of Lancaster, City of Liverpool,
 Consulate of the United States of America, ss_:

Before me Wilfred V. Duke, Consul of the United States of America, duly
commissioned and qualified, personally came John Bryan McFarland and
Meryl McFarland, of 7a Riversdale Road, Liverpool, 19, England, who
being duly sworn, depose and say that:

Q. When and where did you board the bus for Mexico City?

A. We boarded the Continental Trailways bus at Jackson, Mississippi,
and traveled via connecting buses to Mexico City where we arrived
September 27, 1963.

Q. When and where did you first see the man later identified as Lee
Harvey Oswald?

A. We changed buses at Houston, Texas, at 2:00 a.m. September 26th and
it was probably about 6:00 a.m. after it became light that we first saw
him.

Q. What reason did Oswald give for traveling to Mexico?

A. He stated that he was en route to Cuba and that he could not travel
there from the United States as it was against the law.

Q. Did you see Oswald speaking to any other persons?

A. Yes. We observed him conversing occasionally with two young
Australian women who boarded the bus on the evening of September 26th
at Monterrey, Mexico. He also conversed occasionally with an elderly
man who sat in the seat next to him for a time.

Q. When did it first occur to you that Lee Harvey Oswald was the man
you had met on the bus?

A. When we saw his pictures in the newspapers.

Q. How many suitcases was Oswald carrying when he boarded the bus at
Houston, Texas, or any other time?

A. We did not see him carrying any suitcases at any time.

Q. Did Oswald check any luggage with the bus company so it would have
been carried underneath the bus in the baggage compartment?

A. We never actually saw him check any luggage in with the bus
company, but in the bus station at Mexico City the last we saw of him
was waiting at the luggage check-out place obviously to collect some
luggage.

Q. What kind of luggage was he carrying?

A. We did not notice but presume he must have been carrying some hand
luggage.

Q. Did he check any suitcases or other packages at a place en route to
Mexico City or otherwise dispose of them?

A. We never actually saw him check any luggage in with the bus
company, but in the bus station at Mexico City the last we saw of him
was waiting at the luggage check-out place obviously to collect some
luggage.

Q. What kind of clothing was he wearing?

A. As far as we recollect, ordinary slacks and, a more definite
recollection, a sort of zipper jerkin.

Q. Did he mention any names or places either in the United States or
Mexico, in any connection whatever?

A. Only New Orleans, whence he said he had come. In the course of
conversation, we worked out that he must have left New Orleans at about
the same time we had left Jackson, Mississippi, i.e. 2:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, September 25th, 1963.

Q. Did he show you any documents, such as passport or Fair Play for
Cuba Committee Card, or letters, newspaper clippings or other similar
material? If so, describe them as fully as possible.

A. We saw no document, but he said he was the secretary of the New
Orleans branch of the Fair Play for Cuba Organization, and that he was
on his way to Cuba to see Castro if he could. We saw him at the next
table to ourselves in the Customs Shed at Laredo, but did not notice
his passport or tourist card.

Signed the 28th day of May 1964.

    (S) J. B. McFarland,
        JOHN BRYAN McFARLAND.
    (S) Meryl McFarland,
        MERYL McFARLAND.



TESTIMONY OF PAMELA MUMFORD

The testimony of Pamela Mumford was taken at 12:30 p.m., on May 19,
1964, at 611 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, Calif., by Mr. Joseph A.
Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Miss Mumford was
accompanied by her attorney, Mr. C. C. Dillavou.


Pamela Mumford, called as a witness herein, having been first duly
sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Mr. BALL. You received a letter, didn't you, from Mr. Rankin, as
counsel for the Commission, advising you that we would request you to
give your deposition?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; that's right.

Mr. BALL. And you also received a copy of the joint resolution of
the Congress, didn't you, authorizing the Commission to proceed to
investigate the facts concerning the assassination of President Kennedy?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And you willingly give your deposition today, do you not?

Miss MUMFORD. I do.

Mr. BALL. To tell us all the facts that you might know to assist us in
this investigation?

Miss MUMFORD. Right.

Mr. BALL. Your name is Pamela Mumford?

Miss MUMFORD. Right.

Mr. BALL. Where do you live?

Miss MUMFORD. 153 North New Hampshire Avenue, Los Angeles 4.

Mr. BALL. What is your occupation?

Miss MUMFORD. Secretary.

Mr. BALL. A legal secretary?

Miss MUMFORD. Legal secretary.

Mr. BALL. And you work for the firm of Dillavou & Cox, do you?

Miss MUMFORD. Right.

Mr. BALL. That is in a building at 6th and Grand, Los Angeles, Calif.?

Miss MUMFORD. Right.

Mr. BALL. Now, because of the fact that you will not appear before the
Commission, and the members of the Commission will have to read this
deposition, they would like to know something about you: Where you were
born, your education. So, just go ahead and tell me all you can about
yourself.

Miss MUMFORD. Well, I was born in the Fiji Islands in 1941, and my
father was transferred to Australia in 1951. I was brought up and went
to school in Australia until 1961.

And then I traveled to England, where I worked for a period of a year.
I went to Europe and then I obtained a working visa to come to the
United States.

I worked in New York for 8 months and then my friend and I traveled
through the United States and Mexico on our way to Los Angeles where we
intended to remain.

Mr. BALL. Now, what was your friend's name?

Miss MUMFORD. Patricia Winston.

Mr. BALL. And she left Australia with you, did she?

Miss MUMFORD. She left with me, yes. We had been traveling together for
2 years. And she also made the journey through the States and through
Mexico with me. That takes us up to Los Angeles.

Mr. BALL. When did you arrive in Los Angeles?

Miss MUMFORD. In the first week of November 1963.

Mr. BALL. Is Patricia Winston a legal secretary also?

Miss MUMFORD. No; Patricia is an occupational therapist, who was also
born in the Fiji Islands and raised in Australia. Our families were
friends.

And she was unable to obtain work in California owing to certain
California laws. She had to sit for some exam to enable her to work
here.

So, finally, she returned home to Australia in January, mid-January.
And she is there now.

Mr. BALL. As of 1964?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How old is Patricia Winston?

Miss MUMFORD. She is 23.

Mr. BALL. You took a trip into Mexico last fall, didn't you?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And did you travel from New York to Mexico?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, we traveled by bus on a scheme which allowed us
to travel on Trailways buses for a period of 3 months for a certain
amount. We just got on and off at various places we wanted to see: For
instance, Washington, D.C.; Miami, where we stayed a week; then we went
across to New Orleans, down through Texas to Laredo, and from Laredo we
crossed the border also by bus and went to Monterrey.

We spent one day in Monterrey and left by bus at 7:30 p.m. at
Monterrey, and it was on that bus that we met Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. BALL. Where did you buy your ticket to Mexico?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, the ticket we had on this deal enabled us only to
travel in the States, not in Mexico.

So, we bought the ticket on the bus at Laredo and that enabled us to
stop off in Monterrey. But the ticket was from Laredo to Mexico City.

Mr. BALL. And from what company did you buy the ticket?

Miss MUMFORD. As far as I can remember, it was a bus company called
Transporter del Norte.

Mr. BALL. And did you buy the bus ticket in Laredo at the Trailways bus
depot?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What date did you buy the bus ticket?

Miss MUMFORD. It must have been September 25.

Mr. BALL. And you left Laredo at what time?

Miss MUMFORD. Early September the 26th.

Mr. BALL. Didn't you leave the bus depot at Laredo on September 25th,
about 10 o'clock in the morning, or was it September 26?

Miss MUMFORD. September 26. Now, hold on. We had one day in Monterrey
and one night in Monterrey. We left Monterrey, I know, on the night of
September 26 at 7:30 p.m.

Mr. BALL. And you had come down to Monterrey from Laredo the day
before, hadn't you?

Miss MUMFORD. The day before, yes.

Mr. BALL. Now, on the way from Laredo to Monterrey you didn't see
Oswald?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You saw him on a bus that left Monterrey?

Miss MUMFORD. That left Monterrey. But he had traveled from Laredo on
that same bus.

Mr. BALL. How do you know that?

Miss MUMFORD. He told us.

Mr. BALL. Now, you got on the bus at Monterrey on the evening of
September 26 at 7:30 p.m., you just told me?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And what was the company that operated that bus, do you know?

Miss MUMFORD. That was also Transporter del Norte.

Mr. BALL. And were there the same accommodations for all travelers?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; there were. There were four seats in the front that
were occupied by English-speaking people. But, having got on so late in
the journey, we were taken down to the back to sit with the Mexicans.
And we were the only English-speaking people at the back of the bus.

Mr. BALL. All others were Mexican-speaking?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Now, who were the English-speaking people that you mentioned?
Will you describe them?

Miss MUMFORD. There was a young English couple who were traveling down
to the Yucatan to study the Indians and their way of life.

There was an elderly English gentleman in his mid- or late-sixties, I
should imagine. He told us during the journey that he had lived on and
off in Mexico for 25 years.

Then there was the young Texan, Lee Harvey Oswald, and Patricia and
myself.

Mr. BALL. Now, when you first boarded the bus did you speak to the
English-speaking people?

Miss MUMFORD. We got on and Oswald heard Patricia and I talking. And we
had two heavy overnight bags, and he told us later that he had turned
to his companion, who was the middle-aged English gentleman, and said,
"I wonder how you say 'How can I help you' in Spanish", which gave us
the opinion later that he couldn't speak the language: couldn't speak
Spanish.

He took us for two Spanish girls, I guess, and was going to help us
with our luggage.

Mr. BALL. Did he help you with your luggage?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You went on to the back of the bus?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. You didn't say anything to the four English-speaking people
when you first got on the bus?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. And they didn't speak to you?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. When did you first speak to any of these four?

Miss MUMFORD. Oswald was the first one we spoke to. He left his seat
and came down to the back of the bus to speak to us.

Mr. BALL. That was after the bus had left Monterrey?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And while it was en route?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What did he say to you?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, he said that he had heard us speaking English and
wondered where we came from.

He then told us the story of how he had thought we were Mexican and was
going to help us if he could speak the language.

Mr. BALL. What did he say? Can you tell me his language as close as you
can?

Miss MUMFORD. No, I can't really put it into his words; not at that
stage. He then proceeded to tell us about himself.

Mr. BALL. What did he say?

Miss MUMFORD. I will have to refer to notes. Oh, yes; the first thing
he told us was that he was from Fort Worth, in Texas. And he wanted to
know where we had been, and we told him we were Australians.

He wanted to know the places we had visited. We told him.

And he mentioned that he had been in Japan while he was in the Marines,
and that was the closest he had got to Australia and that he would very
much like to go to Australia.

He then told us that he had been to Russia and asked whether we had
ever been to Russia. We said no, and we told him of a friend of ours, a
fellow Australian, who had been to Moscow, and her experiences there.

And we asked him what he was doing in Russia and did he have trouble
getting in. He said that he was studying there. He had an apartment in
Moscow and was studying. We didn't ask him what he was studying.

At this stage he showed us his passport that had a Russian stamp on it;
some sort of a Russian stamp. And he didn't mention his Russian wife at
all. But we noticed he had a gold wedding ring on his left hand.

We made about three stops or four stops every 2 or 3 hours, and he
didn't speak to us during these stops. We got speaking to the other
British people.

Mr. BALL. Did he speak to you again after that time that he first came
back?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; oh, about 2 hours before we arrived in Mexico City
he asked us whether we had accommodations arranged there. And we said
no, we had a vague idea from a book called "Mexico on Five Dollars a
Day" where we were going to stay.

And he suggested that on previous trips to Mexico City he had stayed
at a place called the Hotel Cuba, and he recommended it for clean and
cheap living.

And he then made a crack that he wasn't suggesting the Hotel Cuba
because he was going to be there; he just suggested it to help us.

And we decided that we wouldn't take him up on his suggestion; that we
would go our own way.

Then we arrived in the Mexico City bus station and he didn't speak to
us, attempt to speak to us at all. He was one of the first off the bus
and the last I remember seeing him he was standing across the end of
the room.

Mr. BALL. At the bus station?

Miss MUMFORD. At the bus station. And we left by taxi.

Mr. BALL. Then you had two conversations with him?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Or more?

Miss MUMFORD. No; two. During the trip I engaged the middle-aged
English gentleman in conversation, asking him about the weather, and
what it was like usually. And he said, "The young man traveling beside
me has traveled to Mexico also. Why don't you talk to him?" And that
was all.

Mr. BALL. Where were you when you talked to the English gentleman; the
elderly man?

Miss MUMFORD. Just standing outside at one of the rest stops, standing
outside waiting to board the bus.

Mr. BALL. Did you talk to any one of these four people as the bus was
en route, except Oswald; the four English-speaking people?

Miss MUMFORD. Not on the bus. We did speak to the young English couple
for a while, told them where we had lived in London, and they had told
us very vaguely, I remember, that they were also traveling through the
United States, but their main aim wasn't to go to the tourist resorts
in America but to go down to Mexico.

Mr. BALL. Did you get their names? Did they tell you their names?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You didn't ask them their name?

Miss. MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. When did you talk to this elderly English gentleman who was
sitting beside Oswald when you first got on the bus?

Miss MUMFORD. The only time we talked to him was at one of the rest
stops outside the bus. And I just happened to ask him about the
weather, and that was the only conversation.

Mr. BALL. Did he say anything else to you on the trip except that there
was a young man sitting next to him that had been in Mexico before?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. That's all he said?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. About how many people were on this bus?

Miss MUMFORD. There must have been about 14 rows on both sides, with
two people on each. About 50, 55. It was crowded.

Mr. BALL. I have a note here of a statement you made to an agent for
the Federal Bureau of Investigation on the 18th of December in which it
was reported that you estimated about 39 passengers.

Do you recall that? Did you ever say that?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, these were conflicting reports, naturally. The FBI
questioned Patricia at our apartment and he then questioned me here
and, naturally, two people get different ideas on a bus load.

But, it was well crowded. There were a lot of children on the bus. I
should imagine there would be--they were long, great big, long, heavy
buses.

Mr. BALL. Were there any vacant seats when you got on?

Miss MUMFORD. Quite a few people boarded in Monterrey. And we were a
bit frightened that we wouldn't get a seat together. But I think we
were one of the few people who got on first.

Mr. BALL. What part of the bus did you sit in?

Miss MUMFORD. In the middle of the bus, more towards the back than the
front.

Mr. BALL. Did the English man ever come back while you were being
seated and speak in Spanish to any of the Mexican people?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You don't recall that the English man ever came back and
asked the Mexican people to make room for you to sit down?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. At the bus stops, you say, you did not talk to Oswald?

Miss MUMFORD. No. He was the first off the bus and the last back on. He
had a meal at every bus stop.

Mr. BALL. Oh, he did?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. He ate at every bus stop?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes. I never saw him ordering. I took it that he didn't
speak the language, but he always managed to order himself a large
meal, because he never seemed to get it over to them what he wanted.

Mr. BALL. What gave you the impression that he did not speak the
language?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, simply that on arriving on the bus he told us--when
we had boarded the bus he had told us that he had turned to the English
gentleman and asked "I wonder how you say 'Can I help you' in Spanish."

Mr. BALL. You told him when he came back to talk to you that you had
had a friend travel in Russia?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And you say you had mentioned her experiences. What did you
tell him about that?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, we said that she had come back and told us that
Moscow was a beautiful city and she had gathered the impression that
they were being taken on a tour and shown only what they wanted to be
shown.

She, being a school teacher, asked a lot of questions of their female
guide, and the questions just were evaded or not answered.

And she said she got the impression that she was told to say certain
things and nothing else.

Mr. BALL. Did Oswald make any remark to that?

Miss MUMFORD. No; the only remark he made on his life in Moscow was
that he had had a lot of trouble getting out. That's all he said.

Mr. BALL. Did he make any statement at all concerning his life in the
Soviet Union; whether he had enjoyed the stay there or not?

Miss MUMFORD. No; he gave me the impression that he was the average,
normal American citizen who had gone over there and had wanted to get
out and couldn't get out for some red tape reasons.

Mr. BALL. Did he say anything or make any mention of politics?

Miss MUMFORD. No; never.

Mr. BALL. Did he mention anything about communism, socialism, or
anything of that sort?

Miss MUMFORD. No; he never said anything about his political views or
even mention politics at all.

Mr. BALL. You did see his passport, though?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How did he happen to show you this passport?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, I think it was rather to prove that he had been in
Russia. I think he was trying to find places that we hadn't been that
he had, and he just--in fact, he left us at the seat to go up and take
his passport from his traveling bag and bring it down to show us.

Mr. BALL. Had he told you his name before that?

Miss MUMFORD. He never mentioned his name once.

Mr. BALL. He never did?

Miss MUMFORD. He never introduced himself; no.

Mr. BALL. How did you know his name?

Miss MUMFORD. We didn't.

Mr. BALL. Did you notice the name on the passport?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, I didn't; no. Pat says it rang a bell when the rest
of the business came up, and we recognized him on television. And she
said, when the name came through on the television, it did ring a bell
with her, but she said even then she couldn't picture that name on the
passport.

Mr. BALL. You did see the name on the passport, did you?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, yes, he must have shown it to us. I can't really
remember.

Mr. BALL. But you didn't remember the name?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You made no note of it?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. Did the elderly Englishman ever make a statement to you as to
whether or not the young man sitting next to him on the bus, that is,
Oswald, had been to Mexico City before, or been to Mexico before?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; Oswald must have told him he had been there numerous
times, because this Englishman did refer us, or did refer me to Oswald
and say "He has been there before. Why don't you ask him?"

Mr. BALL. Did he say he had been to Mexico City or Mexico before?

Miss MUMFORD. I think we were speaking about Mexico generally, because
we had contemplated a trip down to Acapulco, and I was interested in
the difference in temperatures.

Mr. BALL. Was that at a bus stop?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes, outside the bus; a rest stop.

Mr. BALL. Now, you gained some impression, didn't you, from talking to
the English man, that he had not known Oswald before?

Miss MUMFORD. Only by his reference to Oswald as "the young man sitting
next to me." They were talking quite a lot, the four of them.

In the first two seats were the young English couple, and directly
behind them were Oswald, sitting on the aisle, and the Englishman,
sitting near the window. And we could hear them talking a lot, and
laughing, when we were sitting in the back, wondering what was going on.

Mr. BALL. Did you gain the impression from anything else said by the
Englishman that he was not traveling in the company of Oswald?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. Nothing except that he referred to him as the young man----

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; but they never spoke to each other on rest stops.
Oswald just went his way completely.

Mr. BALL. When you arrived at Mexico City did the English man get off
the bus with Oswald, or at the same time when Oswald did?

Miss MUMFORD. I don't remember. I remember Oswald was standing
completely alone in the bus station.

Mr. BALL. What did the Englishman do?

Miss MUMFORD. I don't remember what he did at all. We got off the bus
and I don't remember seeing him leave the bus even.

Mr. BALL. Now, did you have any conversation with the English couple to
indicate that they had never before seen Oswald?

Miss MUMFORD. No; I don't think they made any reference to him at all.

Mr. BALL. The Federal Bureau of Investigation agent that you talked
to on the 12th of December stated this: That in talking with the
Englishman, the elderly Englishman, he said, and I will quote what he
put down, "I gather the young man sitting with me has been to Mexico
City before."

Do you remember words like that used by the Englishman?

Miss MUMFORD. That may have been his words. I really don't remember.
That was just the general impression I got of what he said to me.

Mr. BALL. Now, also at that time, the agent reported that it was your
opinion that "Oswald was traveling alone, and that he had had no
previous contact with any of the English-speaking people on the bus
prior to that time." Did you tell him that?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; and that is still my opinion.

Mr. BALL. Did you have breakfast on that morning before you got into
one of your stops? Did you have a breakfast?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Where? Did you notice the name of the place?

Miss MUMFORD. No; I don't know the name of the place. It was about 6
a.m. in the morning and we arrived in Mexico City at about 10, so it
would have been about 4 hours before we arrived in the city.

Mr. BALL. Did you eat with Oswald at that time; eat breakfast with him?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. Did he eat breakfast with anyone?

Miss MUMFORD. I don't remember at that particular stage. Earlier in the
night, twice, I knew he ate alone.

Mr. BALL. In the statement which the agent reported, the agent reported
his conversation with you, and he says that, "Oswald always ate alone
except for breakfast on the morning of September 27, 1963, when he ate
with the English couple." Do you remember whether Oswald ate breakfast
with the English couple?

Miss MUMFORD. I don't; no. Pat may have remembered that. I don't
remember seeing him at all in that particular restaurant.

Mr. BALL. Did you give this young man a nickname?

Miss MUMFORD. "Texas."

Mr. BALL. Did you call him "Texas" to his face?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You just called him "Texas" when you----

Miss MUMFORD. No; we wrote home from Mexico City describing the awful
bus trip, with crying kids, et cetera, and happened to mention that
there was a young Texan and we called him "Texas."

Mr. BALL. But you didn't call him "Texas" to his face?

Miss MUMFORD. No, No.

Mr. BALL. How was this boy from Texas dressed?

Miss MUMFORD. He was dressed casually. I don't remember what color
trousers he had on. He had on a dark sweater. I know that. It was a
wool sweater, a sort of a charcoal gray color.

When we saw him on television, being arrested or being taken down to
the Dallas County jail, Patricia was the first to recognize that that
was the same sweater. We were reluctant to believe this, of course,
at first; that we knew this man. But she said the thinning hair on
the top, the thinning, curly, wiry hair, plus the sweater that she
recognized right away, and I recognized afterwards, made us almost
certain that this was the same man.

Mr. BALL. Did he have a shirt on?

Miss MUMFORD. I don't remember. In discussing this with Patricia
she said that she felt he had some sort of a checked shirt on, just
underneath.

Mr. BALL. He didn't have a tie on?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. Open?

Miss MUMFORD. Open sport shirt; yes.

Mr. BALL. And did he have on a jersey; pale-green jersey that you
noticed?

Miss MUMFORD. No; not pale green.

Mr. BALL. Now, you said he had some luggage. Did you see the luggage?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How much luggage did he have?

Miss MUMFORD. Just one medium sized--I can't remember whether it was an
overnight bag or one of these pouch affairs, you know.

Mr. BALL. Was it a zipper bag?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, I thought it was a zipper bag. I am not really
certain on that point.

Mr. BALL. What color was it?

Miss MUMFORD. I don't know.

Mr. BALL. Did he have the bag with him in the seat, or near the seat
where he was sitting?

Miss MUMFORD. Up on the railing, above him.

Mr. BALL. And when he left the bus in Mexico City did he carry the
luggage with him?

Miss MUMFORD. I can't say for sure.

Mr. BALL. When you last saw him standing in the bus depot did he have a
piece of luggage in his hand?

Miss MUMFORD. I can't remember that either.

Mr. BALL. Did Oswald tell you where he had boarded the bus?

Miss MUMFORD. No; I don't think he did.

Mr. BALL. What was the name of the bus depot in Mexico City where you
last saw Oswald?

Miss MUMFORD. I am not sure of that. I know the name of the bus, or I
am fairly certain of the name of the bus. But I am not sure of the bus
station.

Mr. BALL. Were there a lot of bus stations?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, that is a point I am not sure of. We took a bus
down to Acapulco from Mexico City and I have the feeling that was the
busline we took to Acapulco. I know there are about three different
buslines situated in different places in Mexico City, and I am not sure
just what was the name of the depot we came into.

Mr. BALL. Now, again, on the luggage, did he have one or more pieces of
luggage?

Miss MUMFORD. I think it was one.

Mr. BALL. Just one?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And that was a zipper type?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Are you able to tell me what color it was?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You saw Oswald on television after the President had been
shot, didn't you?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Now, tell me where you were when you saw the television and
who was with you and what you said.

Miss MUMFORD. On the Friday night of the 22d, Pat and I left by bus
for Las Vegas for the weekend. Patricia was not working at that time.
I am not sure whether she had seen television shots--I think we had
both seen television shots before we left for the bus station. I am not
familiar with whether we realized at that stage that it was him or not.

I remember in Las Vegas we had a television in our motel room and it
was then that we were both very sure that it was the same man.

Mr. BALL. You saw him on television, did you?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And you thought you recognized him then?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. As the man you had met on the bus?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. The man you have referred to as "Texas"?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; well, we knew we had seen him somewhere before, and
we were sort of going over our travels in our mind, and it hit us that
it was on that bus, particularly when they said he was from Fort Worth,
or from Texas.

Mr. BALL. Now, can you give me a description of the Englishman; what he
looked like? You told me his approximate age.

Miss MUMFORD. He was short. Yes; about 5'8". Quite bald, plump; fat. He
was also dressed casually.

Mr. BALL. Did he have a tie on?

Miss MUMFORD. I don't remember. He seemed to me not to be well dressed.
He was scruffy. He spoke well. He spoke with a cultured English accent
more than a Cockney or a suburbia accent.

Mr. BALL. Did he tell you whether or not he had lived in Mexico before?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; Not--he didn't specify Mexico City. He said that he
had lived on and off in Mexico for 25 years.

Mr. BALL. Did he tell you his name?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. Well, you were shown pictures of a man later on by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation agent, were you not?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. And they showed you pictures of Oswald, didn't they; Lee
Harvey Oswald?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You didn't ever see a picture of Oswald?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. But they showed you pictures of a man, did they not?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; they showed us two pictures the first time, one
picture I was fairly certain was the same gentleman. The other picture,
whom they said was the same man, I couldn't give that description--I
couldn't say definitely that it was him or even the same man.

The second time the FBI official showed me a photo was some weeks or
months later and I could make a definite--what is the word I want?

Mr. BALL. Identification?

Miss MUMFORD. Identification of that picture.

Mr. BALL. What did you tell the agent?

Miss MUMFORD. Well, that third picture, on the second time he had
showed it to me, was, I was certain, the same man.

Mr. BALL. You mean the elderly Englishman?

Miss MUMFORD. The elderly Englishman.

Mr. BALL. That you had seen on the bus?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see this Englishman again?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. Except this night, or this ride on the bus?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes; that was the only time.

Mr. BALL. Did they tell you that the Englishman's name was John Howard
Bowen?

Miss MUMFORD. No; I don't recall ever being told his name.

Mr. BALL. Or that he might have had the name Albert Osborne?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You don't remember either of those?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. Was your friend with you when the agent showed you the
pictures?

Miss MUMFORD. The first set of pictures, she was still in this country
and she was also shown them. The second set of pictures was shown to me
after she had left.

Mr. BALL. When the first set of pictures was shown to your friend
Patricia Winston, what did she say?

Miss MUMFORD. If I remember correctly, she felt the same way as I did:
that one of the photos was a good likeness, and the other one she
couldn't make an identification.

Mr. BALL. Do you have anything else that you would care to say; any
impressions that you obtained from this ride on the bus that you think
might be of assistance to us?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. You have told us about all you know about that trip, have
you, now?

Miss MUMFORD. Yes.

Mr. BALL. This will be written up and submitted to you for your
signature, I hope this week.

Mr. DILLAVOU. You mentioned to me, Pam, something about the frugality
of this boy in his travels. I don't know if you want that----

Mr. BALL. Yes; we would like that.

Miss MUMFORD. Oh, yes; he did say that the Hotel Cuba was a very cheap
place to stay, and I think either Patricia or myself made the comment,
"Well, that suits us fine because that is the way we do it, too."

That is the only thing I can remember that he said that referred to his
way of travel.

Mr. BALL. Did he say anything about how much money he had, or how much
he could spend or would spend?

Miss MUMFORD. No.

Mr. BALL. That's all.



TESTIMONY OF DIAL DUWAYNE RYDER

The testimony of Dial Duwayne Ryder was taken at 5:25 p.m., on March
25, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building,
Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler,
assistant counsel of the President's Commission.


Mr. LIEBELER. Would you please rise, I will swear you as a witness.

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Please be seated. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a
member of the legal staff of the President's Commission investigating
the assassination of President Kennedy. Staff members have been
authorized to take testimony of witnesses by the Commission pursuant
to authority granted to it by Executive Order No. 11130 dated November
29, 1963, and joint resolution of Congress No. 137. The Commission has
adopted rules of procedure in conformance with the Executive order
and the joint resolution. I understand that Mr. Rankin, the general
counsel to the Commission, wrote you a letter last week and told you
that I would contact you to take your testimony this week. He sent with
that letter, I understand, a copy of that Executive order and joint
resolution together with a copy of the rules of procedure adopted by
the Commission for the taking of testimony of witnesses. You received
that letter?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. And copies of the papers I referred to?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Today we want to examine you briefly concerning the
possibility that you did some work on a rifle for a man by the name
of Oswald who may in fact have been Lee Harvey Oswald. Before we get
into that, we would like to have you state your full name for the court
reporter.

Mr. RYDER. Dial Duwayne [spelling] R-y-d-e-r.

Mr. LIEBELER. What is your address?

Mr. RYDER. 2028 Harvard.

Mr. LIEBELER. What city?

Mr. RYDER. Irving, Tex.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where are you employed, Mr. Ryder?

Mr. RYDER. Irving Sports Shop.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where is that?

Mr. RYDER. 221 East Irving Boulevard, Irving, Tex.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of place is the Irving Sports Shop?

Mr. RYDER. Well, it's a retail sporting goods store.

Mr. LIEBELER. What do you do in your work there?

Mr. RYDER. Actually, my capacity is, I guess you could refer to it as
service manager. I do all the service work, gun work, outboard motor
work, rig boats. I guess you say general flunkie or service man you
refer to it as.

Mr. LIEBELER. How old are you?

Mr. RYDER. Twenty-five.

Mr. LIEBELER. Were you born here in Texas?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir; I was born in Claremont, Ill.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did you move to Texas?

Mr. RYDER. 1945.

Mr. LIEBELER. 1945?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where did you go to school?

Mr. RYDER. Irving High School; actually, I went all the way through the
Irving public school system.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you graduated from the Irving Public High School?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did you graduate from high school?

Mr. RYDER. 1957.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you been working for the Irving Sports Shop?

Mr. RYDER. Five years be close enough; it's a little less than 5, but 5
covers it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you married?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have children?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you been married?

Mr. RYDER. Five years.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you been in the military service?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. What branch were you in?

Mr. RYDER. Went in the National Guard, 49th Armored Division which I am
still an active member.

Mr. LIEBELER. Of the National Guard?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you serve on active duty with the U.S. Army?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. For 2 years?

Mr. RYDER. No; actually it was, let's see, I guess you say it was 15
months, 16, something like that. In other words, while I was on 6
months' training, they activated the 49th Armored Division and I was
called in to stay 9 extra months on active duty.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you stationed while on active duty?

Mr. RYDER. Fort Leonard Wood, Fort Knox for advanced individual
training, and Fort Polk, La., with the 49th.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of training did you receive?

Mr. RYDER. Armored tank training.

Mr. LIEBELER. You served as a tanker at Fort Polk?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. What is your rank in the National Guard?

Mr. RYDER. Now?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes.

Mr. RYDER. Sergeant.

Mr. LIEBELER. What was it at the time you went into active duty?

Mr. RYDER. It was June 11 in 1960 when I reported to Fort Leonard Wood.

Mr. LIEBELER. June what? What was your rank when you went on active
duty?

Mr. RYDER. I was just an E-2.

Mr. LIEBELER. E-2?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; or private--beginner--actually, I had 3 months
actually, National Guard work which waives your time for E-2, three
months' period. Of course, there isn't much difference in pay rate.

Mr. LIEBELER. It appears that there was a newspaper story that appeared
in the Dallas Times Herald on November 28, 1963, and apparently a
version of that story was carried in the New York Times on November 29,
1963, which mentions you. Do you recall being interviewed by a reporter
from a Dallas newspaper?

Mr. RYDER. After the story was out; yes--before, no.

Mr. LIEBELER. What do you mean by that?

Mr. RYDER. Well, the deal is the story came out on Thanksgiving and
early that morning the telephone rang--I would say roughly 7:30 or 8,
something like that--and I answered the phone and a guy introduced
himself and I told him I didn't have any comment and hung up.

Mr. LIEBELER. This was a newspaperman?

Mr. RYDER. To tell you the truth, I didn't pay that much attention. I
was half asleep because it was a day off. I was going to get some of
that extra dozing time, you know, and I just told him I didn't have any
comment and hung the phone up and took it off the hook and later on
that day, CBS television came out and they were wanting a blownup deal
on it to put on television when they found it was opposite which came
out in the Times Herald.

Mr. LIEBELER. In other words, you were not interviewed as far as you
can remember by a newspaper reporter prior to the time the story came
out in the Times Herald?

Mr. RYDER. Not as far as I know. I was interviewed by the FBI and
Dallas Police Department and I believe a couple Secret Service men came
out.

Mr. LIEBELER. Which one of those interviewed you first?

Mr. RYDER. The FBI was the first one out.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember what the date was when the FBI first
interviewed you?

Mr. RYDER. It was on Monday, the day of the funeral of President
Kennedy.

Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 25. Friday was the 22d,
Saturday would be the 23d, Sunday the 24h, Monday the 25th. Do you
remember the name of the FBI man?

Mr. RYDER. Mr. Horton.

Mr. LIEBELER. Horton [spelling] E-m-o-r-y E. H-o-r-t-o-n?

Mr. RYDER. I didn't get his first name. His last name stuck with
me--well, I don't know why; it just stayed there.

Mr. LIEBELER. What did Mr. Horton say to you and what did you say to
him, to the best of your recollection?

Mr. RYDER. Of course, we were closed on that Monday.

Mr. LIEBELER. The Irving Sports Shop was closed?

Mr. RYDER. Right, and he came to the house, so, at that time he showed
me pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald and pictures of the gun and asked me
about it. I said "Well, the face and the body features of Oswald there
was real common in this country." I mean, you know, in this area in
Texas and that to say that I had him in the shop, actually, this was
after a period of time that we boiled it down to. Oh, I told him I had
a ticket with the name Oswald, no date, no address, just for drilling
and tapping and boresighting--no address, or name; he didn't say he'd
like to see the ticket and was looking at the pictures, then I seen the
gun. Of course, from the picture I told him as far as I could remember
I told him I hadn't mounted that scope, you know.

Mr. LIEBELER. You based that statement that you had not mounted the
scope on your recollection that you had not worked on that particular
kind of rifle, is that correct?

Mr. RYDER. Right, on this Italian rifle--I never worked on them. I seen
them but as far as doing any physical work, I haven't done none even to
this date, I haven't worked on any of them.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are absolutely sure about that?

Mr. RYDER. I am positive on that, very positive. So, we went up to the
Irving Sports Shop and I opened it up and got the ticket and showed
him. It was just a little repair ticket actually what it amounted to.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did it have a number on it?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir; I don't remember the number.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you give the tag to Mr. Horton?

Mr. RYDER. No; he told us to hold on to it, keep it and they would
probably get it later on and they did. It seems to me like it was 2 or
3 weeks ago they came and got it now.

Mr. LIEBELER. Just 2 or 3 weeks ago?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Who came and got it?

Mr. RYDER. I don't know; the boss, Mr. Greener, gave it to him. It was
on Saturday, I believe it was.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did that tag indicate the nature of the work that was to
be done?

Mr. RYDER. Well, actually, all it had on it was drill and tapping;
it said drill and tap and a price of $4.50, I believe it was and
boresight, of course, no charge on that, so by us charging $1.50 a
hole--that's what we normally charge for drillin' and tappin'--would on
this particular thing, would have been three holes drill and tap, where
in the picture of the gun there was only two screws holding the mount
of the scope on which is, more or less, made it positive we hadn't
mounted it on the gun, so Mr. Horton, so he took it for granted that I
hadn't done the work on it and I am sure I haven't because----

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of gun was it?

Mr. RYDER. It was a 6.5 Italian.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know the make?

Mr. RYDER. Like I say, I have seen several of them but as far as who
made the gun, I don't know; probably some Italian gun manufacturer but
as far as who it was, I don't know. I can't read Italian.

Mr. LIEBELER. Could you tell from looking at the ticket when this work
was done? First of all, the tag was not dated?

Mr. RYDER. The tag was not dated.

Mr. LIEBELER. Could you make any estimate of the time by looking at
this ticket as to when the work was done?

Mr. RYDER. Well, it was done sometime between the 1st and 15th of
November.

Mr. LIEBELER. How could you tell that?

Mr. RYDER. Because the work was done while the Greeners or the Woody
Francis Greeners, the owners of the sport shop were on vacation.

Mr. LIEBELER. How do you know?

Mr. RYDER. They were gone that 2 weeks.

Mr. LIEBELER. How do you know it was done while they were gone?

Mr. RYDER. Actually, I can't really say too definitely sure but I am
quite sure it was because he doesn't remember seeing the gun in the
shop while he was there. In other words, before they left, and of
course, it was gone when they came back.

Mr. LIEBELER. When you say "the gun," what do you mean?

Mr. RYDER. The one I worked on--in other words, he keeps a pretty good
watch on my work to make sure I'm getting it out on time and he will
check fairly close every day, every other day, and check to make sure
I'm getting the work out, that old work isn't laying there to be done.
He's pretty sharp on remembering names and he would have remembered
that quite surely if----

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have much work of this type?

Mr. RYDER. Yes, sir; at that time.

Mr. LIEBELER. You did have quite a lot of work at this time mounting
telescopic sights?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; when they left, that's 2 weeks prior to the opening of
the deer season here and I guess that 2 weeks I mounted 35, 40, maybe
50 scopes in that week as well as run the business while they was gone
which is quite a headache in itself. That's just prior to hunting
season, you see. Just like I told everybody all along, I couldn't say
specifically if it was by seeing pictures if it was him or another
Oswald. In other words, I don't put that close relation to a man's face
to a particular item of work.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did the deer season open--the 14th or 15th of
November?

Mr. RYDER. The 15th, I believe it was this year.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you say you mounted perhaps as many as 50 scopes in
the 2 weeks preceding that day?

Mr. RYDER. Very possibly.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let's go back to the last 2 weeks in October. Did you
have a similar number of scopes to mount during that time?

Mr. RYDER. Not quite that many. Lot of these guys like to get their
scopes mounted just before they leave. For instance, buying these
license plates and getting your car inspected works the same way. They
wait until the last minute before they really get ready to go.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any recollection of about how many scopes you
might have mounted during the last 2 weeks in October?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir; I sure wouldn't say specific to remember, sure
wouldn't be sure about the number.

Mr. LIEBELER. It would not have been as many as you did the first 2
weeks in November but would it have been more than 10?

Mr. RYDER. Oh, yeah; I'm quite sure. I say roughly 25 scopes. Of
course, a lot of these people that buy their scopes wholesale or buy
a cheap scope that we don't handle, we handle the better priced and
better scopes and they buy these things and mounts and everything
somewhere else and have us mount them.

Mr. LIEBELER. The thing I am working toward here is trying to fix the
date on which this ticket with the name Oswald on it--when the work was
done.

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. If you mounted, say, 25 scopes or approximately that many
during the last 2 weeks of October, isn't it possible that the Oswald
scope could have been mounted during that period of time and your boss
would not have remembered the name Oswald as being connected with one
of those rifles?

Mr. RYDER. Could have, but like I say, he's pretty sharp. He's pretty
smart; I mean in keeping up with the business, you know what I mean. In
other words, the flow of the work that I had; in other words, he keeps
a close watch on it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now you stated that the repair tag had a number on it.
Are these repair tags taken off a book with tags with consecutive
numbers on them?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where do these numbers come from?

Mr. RYDER. We buy repair tags, of course, they have a main base of
the tag, just a tag you can tear off and you can tear off--say I have
number 41626 of the other piece; in other words, have the right tag on
the gun. As far as sequence, we don't use any. We have a box and we
reach over, get a tag, put a man's name on it. The same tag is used on
reels, rods, outboard motors, boats.

Mr. LIEBELER. So there is no possible way in which you could fix the
date by observing the sequence of the number on the tag?

Mr. RYDER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Could you limit it to a period of 2 weeks?

Mr. RYDER. Like I say, it would be from the 1st to around the 14th or
15th of November while the Greeners was away.

Mr. LIEBELER. You said before you were quite sure you never worked on
a----

Mr. RYDER. The Italian gun.

Mr. LIEBELER. The Italian rifle. Do you have any recollection of the
kind of rifle that this Oswald tag referred to?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir; I don't. That's another place where we did--in
other words, I did so many and I was so rushed that I didn't pay a
whole lot of attention to what tag was to have such and such a scope
put on. That is where actually our fall-down went on the thing.

Mr. LIEBELER. There is no indication on the tag as to what kind of
rifle it would be?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you helped at all by the fact that the tag indicates
that three holes were drilled? Do you ordinarily drill three holes on
all rifles?

Mr. RYDER. We boiled it down to this: That there are two type bases
used that have three. The Redfield base and the Buehler base and then,
actually, these could go on any gun that you want. In other words, if
a man bought a Redfield or Buehler base they can be adapted to any gun
with three holes. Now any imported, we couldn't say definitely if it
was imported because the Springfield O3A3 requires three holes; the
British 303 requires three holes. These are guns they use and that's
the only ones we could think of offhand that would require just three
holes, so we boiled it down, it was either Buehler, Redfield base or
with the Weaver base being on the Springfield O3A3.

Mr. LIEBELER. Or the 303 British rifle?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. You say you boiled this down in your conversation with
Horton from the FBI?

Mr. RYDER. Actually, this was amongst ourselves, I and Mr. Greener.
Actually, there was a lady from the Washington press, of course, I
don't know, I forgotten which paper she worked with but she was with
the Washington press and we discussed this with her quite thoroughly.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember her name?

Mr. RYDER. I sure don't. She, in turn, called Klein's and found out
the rifle that was used in the assassination had already been drilled
and tapped. In other words, he had bought the scope and rifle from
Klein's and they were shipped together and all he had to do was attach
it to this particular gun. In other words, the one he used in the
assassination. Of course, they order by serial number.

Mr. LIEBELER. You also testified you did not mount any scope on an
Italian rifle?

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. You say, that when you mount a scope you do not charge
for the process of boresighting, is that correct?

Mr. RYDER. Actually, it's hard to say, really. At that time we were
not charging if we drilled and tapped one, we didn't do it. Now we do
charge extra, $1.50 bore sighting.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recall if there was an extra $1.50 for
boresighting indicated on the ticket in question?

Mr. RYDER. I don't even remember.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember discussing that point with Agent Horton?

Mr. RYDER. Yeah; we talked maybe we did charge $1.50 for the
boresighting. As a matter of fact, I did because $6--or was it $4.50--I
don't even remember that now.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't now remember whether the ticket was for $4.50
or $6?

Mr. RYDER. That's right, right now, I don't. It seems like to me it was
for $4.50 for drill, tapping, and bore sighting. I believe it was for
$4.50. In other words, I didn't charge for boresighting.

Mr. LIEBELER. What do you do when you bore sight a rifle?

Mr. RYDER. Well, I use a sight-a-line. That's actually three different
things but, what it is, it's an optic deal made by this manufacturing
company that has a little cross hair in it just like a scope. It lays
like such instead of like such [illustrating]. By taking a little sprig
that fits different caliber rifles, fits in the rifle, you look through
the scope and line the four cross hairs together to the center point
of the cross hairs. It doesn't zero a gun by any means. It just gets
you--oh, better where you can tell where you're hitting.

Mr. LIEBELER. So, you can't really zero a gun any by just boresighting
it?

Mr. RYDER. No; actually, it lines your bore and your sight at one point
or close to one point where you can get your point from there without
wasting ammunition. If I were to anchor a barrel or piece of pipe in
a vise and pick out a spot over there on that building [indicating]
somewhere; say, draw a circle and I line this with that and aline the
sight, I have a scope or open sight either one, over to that point, I
go to shoot at it offhand and there's a different way I hold that gun.
This breaks it down to a fine deal where you understand the difference
between boresighting and zero. If you been in the army, you know the
difference. In other words, this method I was just describing say, to
the building, is the way we use the bore sight.

Mr. LIEBELER. But now you have a little machine that does that?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; we have this little optical instrument we use now which
makes it simple and faster.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever worked with any rifles that came from
Klein's in Chicago or mail-order rifles that came with scopes mounted
on it?

Mr. RYDER. You can't tell unless a man tells you. In other words, to
look at one you can't tell any difference in workmanship.

Mr. LIEBELER. As far as how the scope was mounted, you mean?

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any way of knowing whether these scopes are
boresighted when mounted by a mail-order house or not?

Mr. RYDER. Most likely they are. Now, I don't know how they operate,
if they do boresight any there or not. I do know for a fact if you
boresight or zero a boresight on a Redfield base or any base except
Bausch and Lomb, other than those, other than the Bausch and Lomb, if
you take the scope off and put it back on you have to rezero. In other
words, if they did boresight it and take it back off and ship it, it's
going to be entirely different when the man receives the gun. It might
be close enough for a man to shoot one in but won't be near as close.

Mr. LIEBELER. You think that a rifle would have to be zeroed in any
event after it had been shipped from a mail-order house before it
could be used to shoot accurately?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; take for example, I have a Model 70 Winchester .30-06
caliber with a K-4 Weaver scope; nearly every season prior to deer
season I will shoot it in and I have found several times it has been
off just by riding in the back of the car. Taking it in and out of a
gun case, things like that will make them off. In other words, they
are not built so rigid that a little something here and there can get
bumped loose so it would be like I say, he would have to have it zeroed
after he received it from the mail-order house, most definitely.

Mr. LIEBELER. If I were to tell you that this particular rifle had been
carried to New Orleans and back in a station wagon and had laid in a
garage in Irving for 2 months prior to the assassination and had been
moved around in the garage, would that lead you to believe it might be
out of sight at that time?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; it could be very possible.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think it would be probable or do you have any
experience to make a judgment like that?

Mr. RYDER. Like I say, of course, I take proper good care of the gun
I got and I have to readjust it quite often when I shoot it in. Of
course, then again, too, later on, from one season to the next I might
change from the way I held my gun which is another thing to make a lot
of difference in the way I shoot but one to be carried that far, unless
it was really taken care of can very, very easily be knocked out of
alinement or out of adjustment. Another thing, too, on just looking at
this picture----

Mr. LIEBELER. The picture of the rifle?

Mr. RYDER. The picture of the rifle that Mr. Horton had; this was a
real cheap, common, real flimsy looking--of course, I couldn't tell by
just looking at the picture say the type of material it was made of,
but to me it looked rather cheap. It would be very easily knocked out
of adjustment.

Mr. LIEBELER. You have never been shown the actual rifle itself, is
that correct?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir; I haven't. I would like to see which mount it is,
see whose make it is, but I haven't seen it yet.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember being interviewed by an agent of the
Secret Service?

Mr. RYDER. They came out and talked to Mr. Greener rather than
myself. Well, I talked with them, too; we had a triangular, circular
conversation--Mr. Greener, myself, and the agent.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the agent's name?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would it refresh your recollection if I said his name was
Elmer W. Moore?

Mr. RYDER. Doesn't ring a bell.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember telling the Secret Service agent that you
were certain after viewing photographs of Oswald that you had never
done any work for him; in fact had never seen him?

Mr. RYDER. Not actually in that tone; like I say, like I told all of
them that interviewed me, even the reporter, that his features are very
common, I say, for the working class in the Dallas and Fort Worth area
and he could have been in the shop, sport shop, I might ought to say,
and be easily mistaken for another person or another person similar
to his features could have been in, but I couldn't say specific if he
had been in the shop or not, I mean, that's something I won't draw a
conclusion on because like I say his features, face and all is common
with the working class here and he could easily be mistaken one way or
the other either for him or for another person.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, as far as outside of the shop is concerned, you see,
I'm troubled to some extent because I have before me a report of the
agent from the Secret Service and a report from the agent of the FBI.
One report says you are quite sure you have seen and talked to Oswald
and the other one says you are quite sure you have not seen him. I am
puzzled by those statements.

Mr. RYDER. Like I continue to say all the way through on their
investigation, both that Secret Service man and from the FBI that he
could have been in the shop; I could have talked to him but to say I
had definitely, I couldn't say I have really talked to him.

Mr. LIEBELER. Could you say you definitely have ever seen him outside
of the shop anyplace?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir; I don't believe I have. I mean I couldn't say
specific because back again to the common features, so on and so forth,
but, actually, we have drawn a conclusion, of course, that is, I and
the boys and people concerned at the sport shop there that it was
either this Oswald with another gun or another Oswald with another gun.
We know definitely that it was another gun. We know that for sure.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you have already carefully considered the possibility
of identifying that other gun but you are not able to do it?

Mr. RYDER. Right; Mr. Greener called all the other Oswalds listed in
the Dallas and Irving directories.

Mr. LIEBELER. He did that?

Mr. RYDER. Right, with no avail; in other words, nothing turned up.

Mr. LIEBELER. Whose handwriting does the name Oswald appear to be
written in?

Mr. RYDER. It's mine.

Mr. LIEBELER. It is your own handwriting?

Mr. RYDER. It is my own handwriting; the whole thing was written up by
me.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did you first discover this tag?

Mr. RYDER. Well, it's kind of funny, actually, how I found the tag. My
workbench generally is cluttered up, you know how tools get scattered
around and I was--I had been to the Evinrude Service School----

Mr. LIEBELER. Here in Dallas?

Mr. RYDER. Yeah, at the Marriott over here and we were talking about it
that evening and, of course, by the time I got back from the service
clinic was just about time to close and we left and that Saturday
afternoon I started cleaning off the workbench and I found the ticket
of which I didn't say anything to anybody else there and when Mr.
Horton came out on Monday, well, then I told him we had a tag. I
didn't want to keep anything back but after he showed me the picture
and everything I apparently drew my conclusions of not working on that
particular gun anyway.

Mr. LIEBELER. How did Horton know to come out to the sports shop?

Mr. RYDER. Actually, I don't know. He evidently was checking all of
the----

Mr. LIEBELER. Gunshops?

Mr. RYDER. Gunshops and hit us on Monday, well, let's see, it was, oh,
it was about 10:30 or 11 that morning whenever he first came out.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are not familiar with this particular kind of rifle,
are you? You have not worked on any similar rifles?

Mr. RYDER. Well, there's quite a few similar but this particular one is
a real oddity. It's an odd job and I have never worked on any. I have
seen several.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever broken one down?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir; never have. As a matter of fact, the only thing I
can remember doing is just pulling the bolt back on it and closing it
back up. That, to me, is common; I always make sure there's no shells
or anything before I look at one. That's the first thing if you hand me
a pistol, I kick the cylinder out or spin it through to make sure it's
unloaded but this gun is real odd, I mean it's a crude-built gun.

Mr. LIEBELER. When a gun is broken down, by that, I am sure you
understand that I mean you remove the action and the barrel from the
stock. The rifle then is, generally speaking, in two shorter pieces.

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. The two pieces you have are shorter than the gun is when
put together?

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. That is generally true because the stock of the rifle
doesn't ordinarily extend to the end of the barrel?

Mr. RYDER. Right; now on some military rifles they do extend all the
way to the end of the barrel or close to the end, put it that way.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you note in connection with the picture that you
observed of this rifle they found in the Texas School Book Depository
Building, did you note whether or not on that rifle the stock went
very close to the end of the barrel or didn't come out so far?

Mr. RYDER. As far as I remember it had been cut off, or, in other
words, it didn't go to the end of the barrel, as far as I remember, I
don't. I am quite sure it didn't. It went a little over half way in the
picture that I saw.

Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned that sometimes in the military rifles the
stock goes quite far along the barrel?

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Is that not a common type of construction in a domestic
rifle or nonmilitary rifle?

Mr. RYDER. Right; or nonmilitary or what we call a sporter rifle your
stock goes half way to the end of the barrel leaving the end of the
barrel to wiggle as it may. A military rifle, M-1, Garand, O3A3, 303,
they all are of wood and completely encased around the barrel. In other
words, you had a piece run all the way on the bottom of it; piece that
filled in on the top side. Lot of people use military rifles or use
sporter rifles that some cut the stock off at a slight angle, say, a
little above half way of the barrel. Others go ahead and spend and
buy the sporter-type stock they can fit their gun to, but as far as I
remember, this stock on the picture didn't go all the way to the end of
the barrel.

Mr. LIEBELER. Unless you can think of anything else that you want
to add at this point I just tell you for the record that my present
inclination is to close the deposition at this point. I may wish to
question you again and possibly bring the rifle down here so you can
look at it. Unless you can think of anything else you want to add at
this time that you think might be helpful, we will terminate. Can you
think of anything else?

Mr. RYDER. No; I can't think of anything right now.

Mr. LIEBELER. I want to ask one or two more questions. You mentioned
you were interviewed by the Dallas police force about this. Do you
remember the name of the man or men who talked to you on the Dallas
police force?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir; I don't. Actually, I say Dallas Police Department,
it was the sheriff's department rather than the Dallas Police
Department, really. Of course, I connect the two together but they're
two separate organizations; I know that.

Mr. LIEBELER. In view of my former statement, I would like to thank you
at this time. If we decide to continue with this, we will advise you in
the future.



TESTIMONY OF DIAL DUWAYNE RYDER RESUMED

The testimony of Dial Duwayne Ryder was taken at 12:45 p.m., on April
1, 1964, at the Irving Sports Shop, 221 East Irving Boulevard, Irving,
Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's
Commission.


Mr. LIEBELER. This is the continued deposition of Dial Duwayne Ryder.
The witness having been previously sworn, we will continue with the
examination.

First of all, Mr. Ryder, I want to show you a picture that has been
marked Exhibit No. 1, on Mr. Greener's deposition. I ask you if that is
a picture of the repair tag that you found here in the shop?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; that is the one right there.

Mr. LIEBELER. It has the name Oswald on it and the words drill and tap
$4.50; bore sight, $1.50; total $6.

Mr. RYDER. That is the one we was thinking about the other day. Did it
have the $6 tag or the $4.50 tag, because we sometimes charge for the
boresight and sometimes don't, depending on the type work we do or what
we actually do on the thing.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the exact details under which you found
the tag in the shop?

Mr. RYDER. Well, we talked about this thing on Saturday morning and
like I said before, like you saw the workbench up there today, that it
is cluttered up, and on Saturday evening I was cleaning it off and
found the tag laying back on the workbench.

Mr. LIEBELER. The Saturday following the assassination?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. You found the tag there yourself?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Had the FBI been out here prior to that time?

Mr. RYDER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. They had not?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did the FBI first come out?

Mr. RYDER. On Monday.

Mr. LIEBELER. On Monday?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; that was on Monday, of the funeral of the late
President.

Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 25, 1963, when the FBI came
out on Monday and you gave them the tag or showed them this tag; is
that right?

Mr. RYDER. He told us to hold onto it, and then they later came by and
got the tag.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever talk to the newspaper reporter about this?

Mr. RYDER. There were several out here after the FBI had been out, and
we told them the same thing that we told the FBI.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you didn't talk to any newspaper reporter before the
FBI came out here?

Mr. RYDER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are quite sure about that?

Mr. RYDER. I am positive about that.

Mr. LIEBELER. It was your impression at the time the FBI came that they
were making a routine check of all guns?

Mr. RYDER. That is my opinion. That is the idea I had.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't know of any special reason why they came to
this particular gun shop?

Mr. RYDER. No; he didn't give any specific reason. He was just checking
us out. Like I say, probably just routine like he checked all others.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now I show you two pictures that have been marked
Exhibits Nos. 3 and 4 on Mr. Greener's deposition. They are pictures of
a rifle, and I ask you if you have ever seen a rifle like that or ever
worked on one here in your shop?

Mr. RYDER. I have seen them but never have worked on one of them.

Mr. LIEBELER. Had you seen them before the assassination?

Mr. RYDER. This is what I was talking about the other day. This is not
as plain a picture as Mr. Horton had. Evidently that is a reprint, but
there are two screws, one here and one here, where on the tag I have
charged for three holes.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are indicating the screws on Exhibit No. 3, that hold
the scope mount to the rifle; is that correct?

Mr. RYDER. Mr. Horton, the FBI man, on the rifle he had it was real
plain and you could see these two screws, and this was a hole, but
there wasn't any screws. There was just two screws in the mount.

Mr. LIEBELER. The mount had three holes but only two screws?

Mr. RYDER. That is apparently in the picture you have here, and this is
what I was referring to as a cheap mount. This looked to me like even
in this picture it was real thin gage metal. I can show you something
like that, that we use on a .22 scope, and that is all we use.

Mr. LIEBELER. But in your opinion it is too light a mount?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; it is too easy to get jarred off on a high-powered
rifle.

Mr. LIEBELER. That would throw the accuracy of the rifle off, wouldn't
it?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. That is all I have, Mr. Ryder. I just wanted you to look
at the pictures, and I thank you very much.

Mr. RYDER. I don't know which one it was, but it looked--it looks like
a copy of the one the FBI man had, except it's been copied over and
over. This is not as plain as the one he had.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let me ask you if the FBI or anybody that ever talked to
you ever showed you any pictures of a man and asked you if you could
identify that man as Oswald?

Mr. RYDER. He showed me a picture of Oswald, but like I told him, I
couldn't say definitely if I knew him or not.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you some other pictures that we have. The
first five pictures have previously been marked Commission Exhibits
Nos. 451 and 453 through 456, and I will ask you if you can recognize
the man or men described in these pictures. Have you ever seen them
anywhere, as far as you can recall? And second, if you have ever seen
him in the shop?

Mr. RYDER. No; they don't look like--too familiar to me.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do they appear to be pictures of the same man to you, or
a different man?

Mr. RYDER. They look actually to me like they are different men. These
two look real close.

Mr. LIEBELER. Referring to Commission Exhibits Nos. 456 and 451?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; they look real similar in their hairline. Actually, I
guess this looks about the same, too.

Mr. LIEBELER. Referring to Commission Exhibit No. 455. But the other
two pictures look a little different?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. The other two being Commission Exhibits Nos. 453 and
454? Now I show you a picture that has been marked previously as Pizzo
Exhibit No. 453-A. I ask you to look at all the individuals in that
picture and tell me if you recognize any of them.

There are two individuals that have been marked by a green mark, but
don't confine your attention to them.

Mr. RYDER. This one I know is Oswald, as the pictures in the paper, but
as far as seeing the guy personally, I don't think I ever have. I could
have, but being in business here, it would be hard to say. Any of the
others, I don't believe I have seen any of the others, but this one,
like I say, just by picture----

Mr. LIEBELER. You are referring to the man that has been marked with an
"X"?

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Or with two lines as opposed to one straight line on
Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-A. I now will show you Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-B,
and ask you if you recognize anybody in that picture? There is a man
marked with a green mark in the left-hand corner of the picture.

Mr. RYDER. This would be the only one. Like I say, seeing him on
television and in the paper, that is as far as I could go.

Mr. LIEBELER. The man marked with the green line, is that right?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Here is another picture which has been marked Pizzo
Exhibit No. 453-C. Do you recognize him?

Mr. RYDER. This is the same picture that the FBI had of Oswald, the
same picture.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't remember seeing this man in the shop?

Mr. RYDER. Like I say, as many people as we have in here, it would
be hard to distinguish one from another unless they come in quite
frequently and you begin to know them. Then you would know what he
looks like and kind of put a name with a face. There are several people
that come in here that have been coming in for several years, but I
can't make this old ticker work up there as to their names.

Mr. LIEBELER. So you aren't able to say whether this man was in the
shop?

Mr. RYDER. He may have or may not have been. I couldn't say for sure.

Mr. LIEBELER. All right, thank you, Mr. Ryder. We appreciate your
cooperation The Commission wants to thank you very much for the
cooperation that you have given us.

Mr. RYDER. Yes.



TESTIMONY OF DIAL DUWAYNE RYDER RESUMED

The testimony of Dial Duwayne Ryder was taken at 7:40 p.m., on July 23,
1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building,
Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler,
assistant counsel of the President's Commission.


Mr. LIEBELER. Will you stand and raise your right hand, please.

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. I believe this is the third time that we have met and I
have advised you previously of the nature of the Commission's work and
you are familiar with the kind of problems that we have?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you are aware of your rights to have an attorney if
you want to--we have already discussed that previously, as I recall,
and you know who I am, and, of course, you are Dial Ryder and you
work at the Irving Sports Shop, and we have had previous testimony
concerning the possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald may have had some
work done on his rifle in your sports shop.

When I talked to you previously, I asked you if I recall correctly
about any conversations that you might have had with a newspaper
reporter from The Dallas Times Herald; do you recall me asking you
about that?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; I do.

Mr. LIEBELER. And my recollection is that you told me that you had
not talked to any newspaper reporters from The Dallas Times Herald in
connection with the story that appeared in that newspaper on November
28, 1963?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And specifically you had said that you had not talked to
a newspaper reporter on the morning of November 28, 1963, although you
did say that on that morning, sometime around about 7:30 a newspaper
reporter did call you from The Dallas Times Herald and told you that
he wanted to talk to you about this whole situation and you refused to
talk to him?

Mr. RYDER. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you hung up the telephone and as I recall, you
testified that you then took the receiver off the hook, making it
impossible for any other calls to come into your telephone; is that
correct?

Mr. RYDER. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you were interviewed by the FBI again on May 18,
1964, and you told them that same story; is that correct?

Mr. RYDER. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Is that in fact correct?

Mr. RYDER. That's right. It sure is.

Mr. LIEBELER. I want to advise you of the fact that we have located the
newspaper reporter who supposedly talked to you that morning and his
name is Hunter Schmidt, Jr., and that he has testified that he came to
work at The Dallas Times Herald that morning and had a lead on this
story that he had gotten from an anonymous telephone call that some
woman made to the FBI and one was made to a television station here in
Dallas telling them that Oswald had had some work done in your sports
shop and I think I previously asked you about this and you said you
didn't have anything to do with those anonymous telephone calls; is
that right?

Mr. RYDER. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Schmidt says that he started looking for your name which
he got from somewhere, apparently in connection with the Dallas Police
Department and tracked you down at your home and called you between
7:30 and 8 o'clock on the morning of November 28, 1963, and that
apparently your wife answered the telephone as you were still asleep
and you came to the telephone and you appeared to be sleepy and that
he talked to you for an extended period of time, and that you gave him
the information that subsequently appeared in the newspaper article on
November 28, 1963, in The Dallas Times Herald.

Mr. Schmidt was advised when he testified that you had denied giving
him this story, although you had admitted that some reporter had
called you on the telephone that morning. Is the name Hunter Schmidt
familiar to you at all?

Mr. RYDER. No; it's not.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether or not that was the particular
newspaper reporter that called you that morning?

Mr. RYDER. I couldn't say definitely for sure--like I said--I told them
I had no comment on it and hung the thing up.

Mr. LIEBELER. In addition to the fact that Mr. Schmidt has so
testified, I have been advised that one of Mr. Schmidt's associates was
sitting right there in the office at the time Schmidt called you and
heard the entire conversation between Schmidt and yourself and he said
that Schmidt did talk to you for an extended period of time, or to a
person by the name of Dial Ryder, who gave him this information about
the gun work being done at the Irving Sports Shop and he said he heard
the whole conversation.

Mr. Schmidt has, during the course of his testimony, volunteered to
take a polygraph examination on this whole question as to whether or
not he talked to you that morning and as to whether or not you gave him
the information about the gun ticket and about the three holes that
were drilled in the rifle and all the other information that appeared
in that newspaper story. I am not here to say myself who is telling the
truth, because I don't know, but it is perfectly obvious that one of
you is not telling the truth, either Mr. Schmidt or you. I don't know
what reasons you would have for not telling the truth, and I don't know
what reasons Mr. Schmidt would have for not telling the truth, but I
wonder if on reflection and in view of the statements that I have just
made to you, if you can ponder this whole question and perhaps refresh
your recollection. I don't know whether you talked to this newspaper
reporter or not, but in view of the fact that we have this other
testimony, I wonder if it would in some way refresh your recollection
that in fact you did talk to this man?

Mr. RYDER. No; like I said, the only people I talked to were Mr. Horton
with the FBI and then the Dallas Police Department or the sheriff's
department--is the only ones I talked to about this, until, like I
told you--the CBS reporters came out and we made the television deal
after radios and everything got the thing and then we thought we had it
straightened out with them, but as far as that morning, I didn't talk
to anybody over the phone about it except I said I had no comment and
hung up the receiver and then took the receiver back off of the hook
and went on about my business of sleeping on this Sunday morning.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know a woman by the name of Edith Whitworth?

Mr. RYDER. Let's see--there was a lady from the Washington Press.

Mr. LIEBELER. No; this is a woman who used to run a furniture shop in
Irving, which is down on Irving Boulevard.

Mr. RYDER. No; I don't know her.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether Mr. Greener knows her?

Mr. RYDER. Now, he might--I don't know.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know any woman by the name of Mrs. Gertrude Hunter
who also lives in Irving and is a friend of Mrs. Whitworth's?

Mr. RYDER. No, sir; I don't know them.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you aware of the fact that just down Irving Boulevard
from the Irving Sports Shop, a block and a half or so west, there used
to be another gunshop where a man carried guns?

Mr. RYDER. Well, there was a little place down there where he handled
guns--I don't know whether--if he was able to work on them or not,
but it was about two blocks down the street or a block and a half or
something like that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Toward the west?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And do you know that there used to be a used furniture
shop that was there?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; it's still there.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you didn't know the people that ran it?

Mr. RYDER. No; I didn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Mr. Schmidt is sitting out here in the front office
and I'm going to ask him to come in and have you two gentlemen discuss
this problem, see if there is some way we can resolve this story on
this telephone conversation.

(At this point Mr. Hunter Schmidt, Jr., entered the room.)

Mr. LIEBELER. I have brought Mr. Hunter Schmidt, Jr., into the room
and Mr. Schmidt has previously been sworn as a witness and testified
yesterday on this question. I introduce you to Mr. Dial Ryder.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Mr. Ryder, how do you do?

Mr. LIEBELER. As I have indicated to Mr. Ryder, Mr. Schmidt testified
yesterday that on the morning of November 28, 1963, you came to work in
your office at the Dallas Times Herald and received information of some
sort that possibly Lee Oswald had had some work done on a rifle, on his
rifle or a rifle, in some sports shops or gunshop in the outlying areas
of Dallas. Would you tell us briefly what happened after that, Mr.
Schmidt?

Mr. SCHMIDT. After I got the tip, I traced it down and thought it
was Garland first and I looked it up in the phonebook--the city
directory--and the usual sources that we go through--I looked through
and this Ryder was the only one that I could find, or apparently he was
the one that said what I was looking for.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where did you get Ryder's name in the first place; do you
know?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Well, it was from a tip around the police station. Now, I
don't remember. I have been trying to remember where--who specifically
it came from, but it was one of the many we were getting at that time.
As I said before, we had several different leads on different stories
and that they were coming in pretty thick, so I don't really remember
where I got the Ryder name, but it came from around the police station,
one of our boys covering this angle of the assassination, called in
from down there that a Ryder was supposed to have mounted a scope on a
rifle for a customer named Oswald, so I started checking from there,
and like I said yesterday, I thought at first it was Garland and I had
to do it by a process of elimination.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you went through the city directory and you finally
found it in the phone book?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I believe I used the phonebooks and I found this Ryder and
I called him up.

Mr. LIEBELER. About what time in the morning?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Oh, 7:30 or 8--something like that. I come in at 7 o'clock
and it may be a little after 8, but I estimate it was between 7:30
or 8, but it was early, and I called the Ryder and there was a woman
answered the phone.

Then, apparently the Ryder I talked to, and I guess it's this same Dial
Ryder, I'm not sure, but the Ryder I talked to apparently had to get
out of bed, there was a little interval, and come to the phone, and the
person I talked to sounded sleepy. He gave me the information I got and
it was very matter of fact and I believe you used the term "cordial"
yesterday. I guess--that would be it--he was not antagonistic, but he
was very--just very conversational in the question and answer session
and explanation, and he said he had a ticket with the name Oswald on
it and that it could have been the Oswald. He said he didn't remember
for sure what the face looked like with the Oswald ticket, but he
understands--he said he understood that this Oswald had a very common
face for this area and I asked about buying ammunition or how many
time he came in. I think he was sort of vague on that--he wasn't sure
how many times he had been in, and besides talking about the sighting
the rifle and the boring of the holes, that was in essence what it
was, what we had in the paper. I believe I explained to you about the
boresighting bit.

Mr. LIEBELER. There was some conversation between you about that?

Mr. SCHMIDT. He mentioned the boresighting and I don't think I
understood it fully and that might have been a little incorrect in the
paper, but that was the only thing that this technicality bit about the
boresighting.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Mr. Ryder, you have been sitting here watching Mr.
Schmidt and listening to his voice; does his voice seem at all familiar
to you?

Mr. RYDER. Sure doesn't--not to me at all.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us what your recollection is of what
happened on that morning?

Mr. RYDER. Well, like I have said before, and it is in my
testimony--the FBI has the same thing--the phone rang. It was roughly
7:30, I would say it was closer to 7:30 than it was 8, and the reporter
asked me had I mounted the scope on the Oswald gun and I told him I
had no comment and I hung up, I mean, I took the receiver off the hook
and that's all I done and all I said here.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Mr. Schmidt, after listening to Mr. Ryder's voice,
can you identify it as the voice you say you spoke to on the telephone
that day, or are you unable to do it?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No; I couldn't honestly identify him by voice now. It was
6 or 7 months ago and I only talked to Ryder once.

Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Ryder, do you know of any other Ryders out there in
the area who would have any knowledge of this gun ticket at the Irving
Sports Shop?

Mr. RYDER. Not that I know of--not that I know of.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, as I indicated to you, Mr. Schmidt has volunteered
and requested a polygraph examination to try to clear this matter up,
and I wonder if you have any suggestion that you think of as to how it
might be done?

Mr. RYDER. Well, I'll take the thing if you want me to take it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, I don't want to ask you to do it, but if you want
to request it and assist the Commission in clearing this matter up,
I think we could make arrangements to have a polygraph examination
administered to both of you.

Mr. RYDER. Well, I'm not one to volunteer for anything.

Mr. SCHMIDT. I am perfectly willing to, because I stand beside that
story. I don't know this man personally, if this is the Ryder of the
gun shop, the Irving Sports Shop, and the same one that identified
himself that morning--that was the information I got from him and I
don't have any reason to lie about it, you know, I get the same amount
of pay, I don't get any extra money for that story and I didn't even
get a byline for the story. I knew that it would be just part of a
story. So, I feel like I am a professional with my business and I just
don't like to be doubted.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether or not there was anybody else in
your office at the time you heard this conversation that you had with
Ryder?

Mr. SCHMIDT. There were several men around there but I'm not sure
whether they recall this conversation or not or whether they were even
paying any attention. There are a couple of men that sit right to my
left and a couple to my right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, the Commission has followed the practice of due
regard for the civil rights of the people who have been involved
in this thing and it is not requesting anybody to take a polygraph
examination, and it is not prepared to make an exception in this case
for you, Mr. Ryder. If you want to volunteer to do so, the Commission
will take it under advisement and decide what it wants to do, but it is
not going to request you to do so, and I cannot even put myself in the
position of even asking you to or urging you to or suggesting that you
do so. That's entirely up to you.

Mr. RYDER. Well, like I said, I will take the thing if it boils down to
that. Like I say, and I have contended all along, that I did not talk
to anybody on Thanksgiving Day, that morning. I didn't talk to anybody.
That was my day off.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any conversations with any other newspaper
reporters--that afternoon, but of course, that day--which you said you
wanted to enjoy as your day off, but you did go over to the shop that
afternoon and meet the television people, did you not?

Mr. RYDER. Right, that's after the story broke over the radio.

Mr. LIEBELER. And in the newspaper?

Mr. RYDER. Yes; and in the newspaper, and then we got with the CBS boys
and made the little film that they wanted.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember talking to any newspaper reporters at any
time the next day or the day after that about this whole story?

Mr. RYDER. Well, they were all over the place the next day--on
Friday--Friday and Saturday.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you still take the position that you had nothing to
do with the original story that came out and you never talked to the
newspaper reporters prior to the time the story came out in The Dallas
Times Herald?

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any idea where they got the story?

Mr. RYDER. I still don't know--I kind of felt like where they got it
was over the radio--originally--I don't know. The CBS boys said that
they got it off of the Associated Press wires, is how they got it, or
over the AP.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, it is not the ordinary practice, of course, for the
Commission to advise witnesses what kind of an investigation it has
made in connection with this thing, at least, not until the report
comes out, but I think you ought to know that as a result of the
existence of this gun ticket and the story that you told the FBI and
the Commission, the FBI has attempted to find every Oswald in the whole
Dallas and Fort Worth area and the surrounding area and it has found
many of them and it has questioned all of them, some of whom have moved
out of Dallas and Fort Worth, as to whether or not they ever had any
work done in that gunshop, and you should know that none of them ever
did, and you should also know, and I think you probably do by now, that
Lee Oswald could not have had any scope mounted on the rifle that he
used to assassinate the President in your shop, and in fact, I don't
think you claim you did mount that particular scope?

Mr. RYDER. That's right. We have claimed that it wasn't that one. On
the Monday after, well, it was the Monday of the funeral of President
Kennedy, that Mr. Horton came out and I thought at that time I had it
cleared with him that I hadn't mounted the scope on the gun he used to
assassinate the President.

Mr. LIEBELER. That you had not?

Mr. RYDER. That we had not.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you weren't able to remember Lee Harvey Oswald's face
as being the face of the man who had previously been in that shop;
isn't that right?

Mr. RYDER. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you couldn't associate any specific gun or any
specific man with that particular work ticket; isn't that right?

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any possible suggestions as to where that
work ticket could have come from if it appears, and it certainly does
appear, that no other Oswald came in there and there is no evidence of
any sort to indicate that Lee Harvey Oswald ever had any other rifle
than the one he used to assassinate the President, and he never brought
that one in the sports shop?

Mr. RYDER. All I know is that we had the ticket laying on the workbench
back there and I had written it up and completed the work on it and
the gun had been picked up. Now, as to whether it was Lee Oswald, I
couldn't positively identify him or if there was another one out there
right now I could not identify anybody if they said they did bring it
in.

Mr. LIEBELER. And to the best of your recollection, you wrote that gun
ticket sometime in the early part of November; is that right?

Mr. RYDER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you are certain that you wrote it up before November
22?

Mr. RYDER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you are not able to associate that particular ticket
with any particular gun in your own mind?

Mr. RYDER. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. I also recall that when I asked you questions about this
before, you indicated that possibly we could fix the date on which
this ticket had been written because you had written it with a pencil
and you said you remembered you had gone to Dallas on that particular
day, and that you used a pencil to get some materials from a wholesale
shop. Of course, the FBI, as you now know, has gone and has found out
every day that you ever went to Dallas to get gun materials and asked
you if you could identify the time and the date by reviewing this list
of materials that you got from the wholesale house in Dallas and you
weren't able to associate it with any particular day you used a pencil.

Mr. RYDER. Right; he had 2 or 3 days there that he showed me some
copies--actually, he gave me some dates that I came to town and signed
and there were 2 or 3 days there in that period that I had signed with
a pencil, and it could have been that some of those days I had a pencil
laying handy and I just picked it up rather than taking my pen out of
my shirt.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you be surprised if the Commission concluded, after
this investigation that the FBI conducted and the questioning that we
have done, that there was never any man in there by the name of Oswald
with any gun at all?

Mr. RYDER. Yeah--like I said--all I've got is that ticket with his name
on it and the work being done.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, at this point I think we might as well conclude the
deposition. The Commission will take under advisement Mr. Schmidt's
request to have a polygraph examination administered to him, and I
am advised by one of the U.S. attorneys here that one of the other
reporters over at the newspaper does remember the conversation and we
will take his deposition tomorrow. If you want to have a polygraph
examination administered to you, after reflecting on this, or if you
have anything further to say about the whole thing, contact Miss Stroud
here at the U.S. attorneys' office, if you want to.

Mr. RYDER. Okay. Is that all?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; that's all. Thanks a lot, Mr. Ryder.



TESTIMONY OF HUNTER SCHMIDT, JR.

The testimony of Hunter Schmidt, Jr., was taken at 4:20 p.m., on July
22, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building,
Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler,
assistant counsel of the President's Commission.


Mr. LIEBELER. Would you rise and raise your right hand? Do you solemnly
swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I do.

Mr. LIEBELER. Will you please sit down. My name is Wesley J.
Liebeler. I am an attorney on the staff of the President's Commission
investigating the assassination of President Kennedy. I have been
authorized to take your testimony by the Commission pursuant to
authority granted to it by Executive Order 11130, dated November
29, 1963, and the joint resolution of Congress No. 137. Under the
Commission's rules of procedure, you are entitled to have an attorney
present should you wish to have one. And you are entitled to 3 days'
notice of the hearing, should you wish to insist upon it. And you are
entitled to all privileges in terms of not answering questions that
you would have in any other proceeding. I assume that you are prepared
to proceed at this point without an attorney, since you don't have one
here?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I don't think that it would be necessary.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you state your full name for the record?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Hunter Schmidt, Jr.

Mr. LIEBELER. What is your address?

Mr. SCHMIDT. 1118 Osceola Trail, Carrollton, Tex.

Mr. LIEBELER. When were you born?

Mr. SCHMIDT. September 12, 1933.

Mr. LIEBELER. Give us your educational background.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Tyler High School, Tyler Junior College; I have a B.A.
from Lamar Tech, and I am working on my masters at SMU.

Mr. LIEBELER. In what? In journalism?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No; in government. Two courses and a thesis away.

Mr. LIEBELER. I understand that you are presently employed by the
Dallas Times Herald, is that correct?

Mr. SCHMIDT. That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you work for them in the capacity of?

Mr. SCHMIDT. County editor.

Mr. LIEBELER. County editor. What do you do as county editor?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I cover, or well you might say my beat is everything in
Dallas County outside of the city of Dallas, and parts of Eastern
Tarrant County. That is roughly some surrounding towns, and I take
care of the general news coverage in that area.

Mr. LIEBELER. At the request of the President's Commission, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation conducted certain investigations into the facts
surrounding a story that appeared in the November 28, 1963, edition of
the Dallas Times Herald.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Thanksgiving Day; that's right.

Mr. LIEBELER. The story related to the possibility that Lee Harvey
Oswald had had a telescopic sight mounted on a rifle at a sports shop
in Irving, Tex.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. It is my understanding from reviewing the FBI report,
that you were the reporter that wrote that story?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I gathered facts for the story and gave the facts to the
rewrite man who wrote the actual story, but they were from the facts
that I gathered. We were checking out several, running down all clues
and all possible reports at that time. Anything that might be a lead
to the story, we checked out. We checked out many many things of that
nature, and that was just one of the tips that I checked out.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where did you first get information that Oswald had had a
scope mounted on his rifle at this Irving sport shop?

Mr. SCHMIDT. We heard of it, I think it was around the police station
somewhere. I don't remember where that exact tip came from. We heard
that a gunsight had been mounted by a man named Ryder, and they thought
at first it was Garland.

Mr. LIEBELER. You mean Garland, Tex.?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Garland, Tex.; that's right. Since that was my beat, well,
they gave me the tip to check it and I checked it in Garland and found
out that there wasn't any Ryder listed in the city directory and so
forth, so I did it by process of elimination and checked several towns,
and I found, well, I came to rest on Irving, because I found the Ryder
there listed as the sports shop man, and I just took it that that was
the gunsmith.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recall whether Ryder, when you checked the city
directory, that Ryder was listed as being associated with a gunshop, or
did you just find the name Ryder and call him?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I don't remember exactly what I found in the city
directory then. It was a process of elimination, and apparently that
looked like the only one in Irving, so I checked that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, did there come a time when you called Mr. Ryder on
the telephone?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Yes; this was Thanksgiving morning. In fact, that is the
same morning I got the tip. After the process of elimination, I called
Ryder and it was early that morning. I called out there, and a woman
answered the phone, and he apparently had gotten out of bed, from the
time it took. He sounded sleepy on the phone and so forth. So I talked
to him then on the phone and asked him about the information I got for
the story.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long did you talk to him on the phone about that?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Oh, I am just guessing. I would estimate 15 minutes or
roughly thereabouts.

Mr. LIEBELER. What did he tell you?

Mr. SCHMIDT. He told me--I asked if he had a customer--now this is a
tip we got, that this Ryder mounted a scope for a customer, and the
customer's name on the ticket with the gun was Oswald. And he confirmed
on the phone that morning. And the reason I took it as the truth was
because I didn't think a fellow would get out of bed early and make up
a story half asleep and fabricate a story that early in the morning,
and get out of bed on a holiday. He told me that he had a ticket with
the name Oswald on it, that it was a foreign-made rifle, that he did
put the scope, bored the holes and sighted it in. I asked him if he
bought any ammunition, and he said no; he didn't. I think he said he
didn't remember him buying any ammunition. He then gave me the prices
for the mounting of the scope, $1.50. I think he said he bored three
at $1.50 a sight, and $4.50 for the boresighting--I mean for the hole
drilling. And $1.50 for the sighting in of the rifle. And let's see,
after he gave me the prices and everything, I just took it as pretty
authoritative, because I didn't know that much about rifles.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, you say that Ryder told you that he believed that
the rifle was a foreign make; is that right?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Yes; I asked him what kind it was. He said he didn't
remember for sure, but he said he believed it was a foreign-made rifle.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did Ryder say anything about the fact that he was sleepy
and had not slept well the night before?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No, I don't believe he mentioned that.

Mr. LIEBELER. You have no recollection of that? Did Ryder tell you what
boresighting was, or did you know about that?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No; I might have gotten that mixed up in the story. Some
of the people who know more about rifles than I do said that wasn't
exactly correct. The boresighting was explained in the story, but I did
the best I could with the information I had there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any conversation with Ryder about the
significance of the term boresighting?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Not that I remember. This boresighting thing came
up--there is a fellow down there that knows something about rifles,
and I mentioned boresighting, and then there was a conversation with
the rewrite man that took the facts I had and added to the story. The
top of the story is the story I got from Ryder, and the other part of
the story were some other tips that had been run down and other parts
of the story we pieced together about the general investigation and so
forth.

Mr. LIEBELER. What was Ryder's attitude when he talked to you on the
phone that morning?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Well, it was just a man giving information, as far as I
was concerned. He wasn't antagonistic or anything. It was just a matter
of facts, I would say.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember telling the FBI about this?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Petrocas from Oklahoma; an FBI agent?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I am not sure.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember telling him that Ryder was cordial and
invited you to get in touch with him again?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Yes; he did. I think he said get in touch with him again
if I wanted to, I am not too sure, but it was that type conversation.
He wasn't antagonistic. As a matter of fact, it was like you would get
a story from anybody. Nothing apparently controversial about it.

Mr. LIEBELER. The FBI report that I have also indicates that the agent
says that you told him that Ryder did explain to you in detail the
significance of the term "boresighting." Do you recall telling the
agent that?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I don't remember for sure. That was back, I guess, in May.
I don't remember any detail about the boresighting, but I remember him
mentioning boresighting.

Mr. LIEBELER. This FBI report indicates that on the evening of November
28, 1963, which was the same day that you had talked to Ryder, you saw
a taped television interview?

Mr. SCHMIDT. A denial. He denied the story that he had given me that
morning. But the thing that, immediately after I saw that, I called
one of the fellows on the paper. I think it was Charlie Dameron or Ken
Smart or one of my immediate superiors, and told him I thought the
story had something behind it because they didn't mention the ticket,
they didn't mention about the name Oswald on it, in the denial, and
they didn't mention the cost of doing this.

Mr. LIEBELER. It did not?

Mr. SCHMIDT. It did not, as best I remember, mention the cost of doing
that, and didn't mention the ticket. It just said he denied the report
that he put the sight on the rifle.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, according to this report that I have, and it says,
"Schmidt advised that while at his address the evening of November 28,
1963, he observed a taped television interview on a 10 o'clock news of
CBS television, in which Ryder denied furnishing any of the information
to a Dallas Times Herald reporter as set forth in the article which
had appeared in the newspaper that day."

Mr. SCHMIDT. Right. About that 10 o'clock, I was guessing that that
was the 10 o'clock news. I did see a television denial of that, and I
am just guessing that it was the 10 o'clock news. It was CBS, because
I know I remember it was. It had to be CBS because I believe, and I am
not sure about that 10 o'clock, because the best I can remember, it was
Walter Cronkite reading the denial, and if it was Walter Cronkite, it
couldn't have been the 10 o'clock news, because I don't think he was
on then. In any event, I did see the television denial of it, and I am
pretty sure it was CBS.

Mr. LIEBELER. And Ryder actually appeared on the television taped
program, at that time; did he?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I am trying to remember that. I just remember the
denial clearly on television. I wouldn't swear to Ryder being on the
television tape.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember for sure that Ryder denied furnishing any
information to a Dallas Times Herald reporter?

Mr. SCHMIDT. In that interview he denied having done, having mounted
a scope on the rifle, and he denied the story in the Times Herald, is
what he was doing in essence. And he said he just didn't do it, is what
he said on that, or what the story on the television said.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether or not he specifically denied
having told that story to a Dallas Times Herald reporter?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No; I don't remember if he specifically said that in
essence. I remember the denial being credited to Ryder. As best I can
recall now, the denial being credited to Ryder.

He said he denied the story in the Times Herald, that he did thus and
so, that he mounted the scope. Now I am trying to remember back from
what I saw on that television, because now I understand he has denied
to his boss later on.

His boss had talked to our people at the Herald. He denied to his boss
later on, and his boss talked to us and said that he denied to him
talking to anybody from the Times Herald.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever talk to Greener (Ryder's boss) about this?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us about that.

Mr. SCHMIDT. On the phone.

Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us about that.

Mr. SCHMIDT. He called. He was very cordial. He called in and he said
that--this is after he had talked to somebody else, as I understand it.

Either he called in, or I called him. We got together on the phone, and
I told him that I talked to the man Thanksgiving morning and got those
facts from him. And he said that the guy denied the story, and that was
in essence what was said. I told him I didn't know why he denied it or
anything, unless he figured that it might not go over very well with
the public.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did Greener know about this work that had supposedly been
done on Oswald's rifle, when you called him?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I don't remember discussing that, whether he knew about
the work or not. But I remember pointing out the fact that in the
denial that I heard on television, that the ticket and the cost and
all that wasn't mentioned. And as I have said, I didn't know that much
about rifles, and I told the man I couldn't make up that much about it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember Greener telling you that he was
completely unaware of any of the information that was set forth in the
article that appeared in the paper on November 28, 1963, until after
he had been contacted by a CBS television reporter that afternoon, and
that was the first time that he read it? That he, Greener, had learned
any of the facts about this whole thing?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I believe he said something to that in essence.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ask Greener why Ryder had denied talking to you
and giving you the information?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Did I ask Greener why Ryder denied it?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; as I understand, the sequence went something like
this. You talked to Ryder on Thanksgiving morning, and he gave you all
the information and you wrote the story that came out in the paper.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. And that night you saw on television a program on which
Ryder in general denied ever talking to you, or denied the story that
was printed in the paper?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. And I understand shortly after that time you called
Greener?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I believe it was the next day.

Mr. LIEBELER. You said to Greener, what is going on. Did you ask him
why Ryder denied the story that he had previously given you? That is my
question now.

Mr. SCHMIDT. I could have very well. I do remember talking to Greener
and telling him that, I am sure, I got the story from Ryder that
Thanksgiving morning, and I told him the reasons I thought that it was
a factual story because, as I said before, about getting up early on a
holiday, and the ticket with the name Oswald on it, and the cost and
everything.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now did Greener ever tell you that Ryder had told him,
Greener, that he had never talked to a reporter from the Dallas Times
Herald?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I believe Greener said that Ryder said that he hadn't
talked to anybody, as best I can remember. I think he did.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever talked to Ryder at any other time except on
the morning of Thanksgiving, November 28, 1963?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No, sir; I wouldn't know him if he walked in this room now.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you had any other possible source of information for
this story? Did you talk to anybody in the Dallas Police Department
about it?

Mr. SCHMIDT. About the mounting; no, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. How about the FBI?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No, sir; I got all those facts from Ryder.

Mr. LIEBELER. You got those facts from Ryder?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Yes, sir; nowhere else did I get any information. I
thought that was getting it from the horse's mouth. If I thought there
was anything phony about it, I would have told the city editor about it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Had you given consideration to the reason for Ryder
denying having talked to you? He denied talking to you, he denied it to
the television reporter, and furthermore, he has denied it to me under
oath.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Well, he would have to deny it under oath, but like I say,
I wouldn't have any reason to fabricate the story. I didn't get any
extra compensation for it. I got paid the same thing if I hadn't gotten
the story, if it had been a complete hoax.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, I think you got the information for the story
somewhere. I don't think there is any question about that. But isn't
it a possibility that you might have gotten the information from some
other place, a confidential source of information that you would rather
not disclose? Wouldn't that be a sufficient reason to say you got the
story from Ryder?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No, sir; I had no reason to fabricate anything about Mr.
Ryder. I don't know the man. I have nothing against him. I just have a
story, and I will stick by that story we had in the paper. But the only
thing possible that I would be willing to retract any part would be
some details of how you do the boresighting. But I don't know that much
about rifles as to why he would deny it, except that he possibly could
have thought that wouldn't go over too well with the public, "Here I
mounted a sight on the gun that killed the President." Many people
would think--he never told me that this was the gun that Lee Harvey
Oswald used on the President. He said a customer with a ticket on it
that said Oswald, and I believe I asked him what Oswald looked like,
and I don't think he could put the face with the ticket, if I remember
correctly.

I believe I asked him that, but I wouldn't have any reason to fabricate
anything. And the man I was looking for was the man who mounted the
scope. After I got that with these other bits of evidence behind it, or
evidence in my mind, probably circumstantial, but to me it seemed like
human nature.

Mr. LIEBELER. It was enough evidence to justify writing a newspaper
article?

Mr. SCHMIDT. I think so, and we try to be factual. I think we have
tried to be very factual and very honest on this thing.

At this time you see we were getting things that were hoaxes that was
full of holes, and I wouldn't have any reason specifically to inflate
this.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, you are absolutely firm in your position that on
the morning of Thanksgiving you did call Ryder and you did talk to him
and did get from him the basic facts about the gun, ticket, and the
boresighting and the drilling of the hole?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Absolutely. Like I say about the boresighting. I got the
boresighting statement and details that I didn't know about. But I did
get the cost. I got the ticket with the name Oswald on it, that he
mentioned in the story, the statement about the ammunition. He didn't
buy any ammunition that he could remember.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let me say this to you. We are faced with a situation
where Ryder has denied under oath the statement that you have just
affirmed under oath. It is perfectly clear that somebody is not telling
us the truth.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Obviously.

Mr. LIEBELER. What I would like to do in order to try to determine
who is telling the truth about this question is have you come in here
tomorrow evening at about 7:30 or so when Mr. Ryder is going to be here
again to testify before the Commission. After I discuss this with Mr.
Ryder, by myself, for a while, I would like to bring you into the room
and I would like to have you and Mr. Ryder see if you can't iron out
this apparent inconsistency in the two stories.

Mr. SCHMIDT. It is perfectly fine with me.

Mr. LIEBELER. Then you are willing to do that?

Mr. SCHMIDT. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. At this point, we will suspend Mr. Schmidt's deposition
until such time as we resume tomorrow in the presence of Mr. Ryder. And
needless to say, of course, you will hold in complete confidence the
request that I have made of you now until after we have our meeting
with Mr. Ryder?

Mr. SCHMIDT. That will be fine with me.

Mr. LIEBELER. I would be very unhappy if I found it in the newspaper
before Ryder gets here.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Is it free knowledge after that, though?

Mr. LIEBELER. That is something that is entirely up to you, I suppose.
I don't know if the Commission would request you not to write a story
about it. I would like to talk to Washington, and even if we request
you not to write a story, that is all we can do.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Well, we have tried all the time to cooperate with people.
If there is anything other than that you want me to do, if you have a
polygraph test, I will be perfectly willing to submit to it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have I mentioned a polygraph test?

Mr. SCHMIDT. No; but I would be perfectly willing to submit to that.

Mr. LIEBELER. That is something that we will take under advisement
after we see what happens with regard to Mr. Ryder tomorrow.

Mr. SCHMIDT. Perfectly fine with me.



TESTIMONY OF CHARLES W. GREENER

The testimony of Charles W. Greener was taken at 12:15 p.m., on April
1, 1964, at the Irving Sports Shop, 221 East Irving Boulevard, Irving,
Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's
Commission.


Mr. LIEBELER. I would like to swear you as a witness and she will take
this all down. Would you raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear
that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. GREENER. I do.

Mr. LIEBELER. I think that Mr. Sanders' office called you previously
and told you that we would be out here?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. I have advised you that I am an attorney on the staff
of the President's Commission. I want to ask you about some of the
background concerning the possibility that Lee Oswald or some other
Oswald had a rifle in the shop here and had some work done on it?

Would you state your name?

Mr. GREENER. Charles W. Greener.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you the owner and operator of the Irving Sports Shop
located at 221 East Irving Boulevard in Irving?

Mr. GREENER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Is Dial D. Ryder one of your employees?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you known Ryder?

Mr. GREENER. Approximately 6 years.

Mr. LIEBELER. Has he been employed by you here at the shop practically
all that time?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. We have a repair tag that has the number 18374 on it and
the name Oswald, indicating some repairs were to be made to a rifle. We
will mark this picture as Exhibit No. 1, on your deposition. I show you
a picture of this tag and ask you if that is a tag of the type that you
use here in this shop?

Mr. GREENER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever seen that tag before?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the first time that you ever saw it?

Mr. GREENER. Approximately a week or less after the assassination was
the first time I had seen it. That was on Thanksgiving Day, I guess,
because they called me at home and I was eating and I met some of the
news media to go through this Thanksgiving.

Mr. LIEBELER. Had there been anything in the newspaper about this tag,
or about Oswald having any work done here before you saw the tag?

Mr. GREENER. Yes; it had come out in the news, and this was Walter
Cronkite was to run a retraction on it, or at least clarify the thing.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of retraction?

Mr. GREENER. Well, they tried to clarify the thing to say that we had
a tag showing a certain amount of work for an Oswald, but as far as
relating to that particular gun or that particular man, we had no real
knowledge of the thing.

Mr. LIEBELER. Had the FBI been out there at the shop before this thing
came out in the newspaper?

Mr. GREENER. No; I don't think so. They came out after all the news
stories.

Mr. LIEBELER. How did the newspaper get hold of this, do you know?

Mr. GREENER. I couldn't tell you that.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are pretty clear that it was in the press before the
FBI ever talked to you?

Mr. GREENER. I am pretty sure it was.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you know whether the FBI could have talked to Ryder
or anybody else at the shop?

Mr. GREENER. That I don't know.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are the owner of the shop, are you not?

Mr. GREENER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. Were you here at the shop during the period after the
assassination and prior to the time that the FBI came here for the
first time?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. If the FBI had come here to talk to anybody about Oswald
having been here, they would probably have talked to you, isn't that
right?

Mr. GREENER. It is possible. Now I do know that one newsman came in and
he wasn't going to consult me in any way, so I don't know whether it
would have been the case with the FBI or not.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did the newsman come in?

Mr. GREENER. That was on a--I believe that was on a Monday--following
Monday, as I remember it.

No; wait a minute. No; it wasn't a Monday. That holiday, it's got me
mixed up. It must have been on a Friday after the Thanksgiving holiday.

Mr. LIEBELER. That was after the story had already been out in the
newspaper, is that right?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. This reporter came in and wanted to talk to Ryder?

Mr. GREENER. Right. The paper stated the owner of the Irving Sports
Shop, and he apparently figured that was the correct information.

Of course, all the newspapers, they didn't check out any stories; they
just run to their office and sent it in, as you well know. No one
checked out anything. Anything they could get hold of, they put in
print, and some of the information they got a hold, I don't know where
it came from.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any reason to believe that any reporter
talked to Ryder prior to the time the FBI came to your shop?

Mr. GREENER. One told me he did.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that reporter's name?

Mr. GREENER. No; he was with the Times Herald.

Mr. LIEBELER. Dallas Times Herald?

Mr. GREENER. I couldn't swear.

Mr. LIEBELER. He told you he talked to Ryder?

Mr. GREENER. Ryder told me he hadn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Ryder told you the reporter had not talked to him?

Mr. GREENER. Had not talked to him.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did the reporter tell you when he had talked to Ryder?

Mr. GREENER. He told me that he talked to him earlier in the morning. I
don't know when that was. I am inclined to believe, to the best of my
knowledge, it was Thanksgiving Day. Now I could be wrong on that. My
recollection is that this story first came out--I am thinking it came
out on Thanksgiving Day.

Mr. LIEBELER. I have here a clipping from the New York Times of
November 29, 1963, which appears to be one of the first times that this
story was released in the New York papers at any rate, November 29,
1963.

Mr. GREENER. What was Thanksgiving Day?

Mr. LIEBELER. Thanksgiving Day was on a Thursday, was it not?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 28, so that the 29th would
have been the day that it came out in the New York papers, and it very
likely could have come out in the Dallas paper on Thanksgiving Day.

Mr. GREENER. I think it was Thanksgiving Day when it came out in the
paper, because I hadn't heard anything of it, and I remember we were
playing dominoes when the paper came, and we quit and read the paper,
and then also they had come by to check on this story, and we came up
to the shop and went through that for Walter Cronkite's program.

Mr. LIEBELER. The reporter had come out to check out the story?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let the record show that the newspaper clipping that
I previously referred to is from the New York Times of November 29,
1963, and the story is entitled, "Gunsmith Attached Sight for Man Named
Oswald," and it is a story written by Mr. John Herbers, and it has been
marked as Exhibit No. 2, on Mr. Greener's deposition.

Now do you have a feeling or do you have the thought based on what this
reporter from the Dallas News told you that the reporter had talked to
Ryder prior to the time that the FBI ever came here to the shop?

Mr. GREENER. You are going to have to go through that again. I am not
sure that I was following you all the way. I was thinking a little bit
while you were talking.

Mr. LIEBELER. I am trying to find out at what time this story first
broke, whether the FBI had been here at the shop to ask any questions
before the story came out in the newspapers?

Mr. GREENER. As I recall, no. None of the law enforcing agencies had
been by previous to that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression is that he came here because they saw the
story in the paper?

Mr. GREENER. That is my idea. Either that, or they were informed by the
news reporters.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now did this reporter from the Dallas paper, whose name
you don't remember, tell you that Ryder had called him?

Mr. GREENER. No; he told me that he called him, called Ryder.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you how he got the idea to call Ryder?

Mr. GREENER. No; he didn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you didn't ask him?

Mr. GREENER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss this question with Ryder?

Mr. GREENER. Yes; I did. And he said he had not talked to a newspaper
reporter about it.

Mr. LIEBELER. At all?

Mr. GREENER. Right.

Mr. LIEBELER. So you never had any opportunity or occasion to ask Ryder
whether a reporter or, or whether Ryder contacted a reporter, because
he simply denied talking to a reporter?

Mr. GREENER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember when you asked Ryder about this?

Mr. GREENER. Must have been on Friday, because I was a little bit
aggravated at the whole setup. They got me out of bed a time or two
at night, and I believe that I had called the Times Herald to talk to
this reporter to see where he was supposed to have been getting his
information. I'm sure that after I talked to them that day was when I
questioned Ryder. So I feel pretty sure it was Friday or Saturday.

Mr. LIEBELER. The 29th or 30th of November?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did Ryder ever indicate to you that he had talked to a
newspaper reporter about this?

Mr. GREENER. No; he did not.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any recollection at all of the name of this
reporter from the Dallas newspaper?

Mr. GREENER. No; I don't have the slightest idea about talking with
reporters until this bunch that was going to run the program on Walter
Cronkite's program had contacted me, and he called me.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember his name?

Mr. GREENER. No; I don't remember any of the boys with the television
program at all. They had called me and wanted to come down and take
some pictures, and he called me, Ryder did.

Mr. LIEBELER. The television men had called Ryder?

Mr. GREENER. That was after the newspaper article had appeared in the
newspapers.

Mr. LIEBELER. And Ryder called you and talked to you about it, whether
these men could come down?

Mr. GREENER. Yes; and I came down and met with them.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember what Ryder told them?

Mr. GREENER. To the best of my knowledge, he told them that we had the
ticket, but he didn't remember the name, didn't remember the gun, or
the person, because actually here is the thing about this tag here.
We have tried to keep a little better record. We get busy, you know,
and get a little lax, just like you and everybody else does, and if
we got two or three waiting, why, at that time we were not going to
dally about what the name is or date or address or telephone number or
anything. We felt like we didn't have time.

Mr. LIEBELER. This was just before the deer season?

Mr. GREENER. Yes; I guess the deer season opened November 16 in Texas,
and our workload was pretty heavy, and we were working short handed,
too, which would be one reason for no more information on the tag or
several other tags.

Mr. LIEBELER. Can you fix the date?

Mr. GREENER. No; no way in the world. In the first place, I wasn't
here. I feel sure I wasn't here at the time this went on. I was gone
from--I don't remember what day I left. I started hunting in South
Dakota on November 2, and we came back somewhere between the 12th and
14th.

Mr. LIEBELER. What makes you feel that you weren't here at the time
this tag was made up?

Mr. GREENER. Well, in checking around, I feel like possibly that I
would have noticed it on the gunrack. I would--I don't know whether I
would or not, because I do some of the repair work myself, and a lot of
times I go through the guns on the rack to be repaired, and if it is
something I can do, I take care of it. If he is busy, then I take care
of it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Ryder, you mean?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you have no recollection of this tag?

Mr. GREENER. None whatsoever, until, I believe, it was the day on
Thanksgiving when they came down here. Now, I believe--this has been
a long time and we are going into phases of this I hadn't thought of
in a long time--it seems to me that the FBI got ahold of him and they
come down scouring through the place. That was very possible after the
newspaper report broke. It could have been before, but it seems to me
that that is when the tag appeared. I believe it was an FBI man who was
out here checking.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, now, if that is true, then the tag would have had
to have been found and the FBI man would have had to have been here
before the story broke in the newspaper?

Mr. GREENER. No; I said it could possibly be after the newspaper story
appeared, but I believe when the tag was found lying on the desk
somewhere, that the FBI man was here when it was found.

Mr. LIEBELER. That is the best recollection that you have?

Mr. GREENER. Yes; right now.

Mr. LIEBELER. Who found the tag; do you remember?

Mr. GREENER. No; I don't know. If I remember correctly, and I could
be wrong, because like I said, you are going into things that hadn't
entered my mind since November 22, along in there, and it seems to me
that he had contacted Ryder and they had come down here.

Mr. LIEBELER. The FBI?

Mr. GREENER. Yes, and they found the tag on the workbench somewhere.

Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression now is that the FBI man was here when the
tag was found?

Mr. GREENER. That is my impression; yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. As we discussed briefly off the record before we started,
it appears that there are three possibilities concerning this tag.
One, in view of the fact that Mr. Ryder is quite clear in his own mind
that he never worked on an Italian rifle similar to the one that was
found in the Texas School Book Depository, we can conclude either that
the Oswald on the tag was Lee Oswald and he brought a different rifle
in here, or it was a different Oswald who brought another rifle in
here, or that the tag is not a genuine tag, and that there never was a
man who came in here with any gun at all. Can you think of any other
possibilities?

Mr. GREENER. That about covers the situation, it looks to me like.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any opinion as to what the real situation is?

Mr. GREENER. Nothing more than I have confidence in the boy, or I
wouldn't have him working for me.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't think he would make this tag up to cause a lot
of commotion?

Mr. GREENER. I don't think so. He doesn't seem like that type boy. I
have lots of confidence in him or I wouldn't have him working for me
and handling money. Especially times I am going off. He--if he wasn't
the right kind of boy, and he pretty well proved he is by dependability
and in all the relations that we have together, and I just don't figure
that is possible. Now I say I don't figure that. Of course, there is
always possibilities of everything, but I don't feel that way.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't feel Ryder would do that?

Mr. GREENER. Not at all; no.

Mr. LIEBELER. When we look at this tag, it appears in the photograph
that it is in two parts. There is a top part entitled "Repair Tag,"
on which writing appears, reading "Oswald, drill and tap, $4.50.
Boresight, $1.50." Or a total of $6. And it appears at the lower part
of the tag; it is in the form of a claim check; isn't that correct?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. The tag number, as I have indicated, is 18374. Would I be
correct in assuming that if this tag had been made up when a customer
came in and left their rifle, that the part of the tag entitled "Claim
Check" would ordinarily have been torn off and given to the customer?

Mr. GREENER. No; you are wrong in assuming that. Because I believe
19 out of 20 would not ask for a claim check. In the first place, 18
out of that 20 would lose the claim check before they got back, so if
you are going to give them a claim check and stick to the thing, not
letting them have the merchandise if they don't have the claim check----

Mr. LIEBELER. You are running into a lot of trouble from a business
point of view?

Mr. GREENER. Yes; when they come back for the merchandise, I ask them
what the name is, and if we have a gun to go by the name----

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you ordinarily tear off the claim check?

Mr. GREENER. No. If you look at the rack, you won't find one on the
whole rack that has a claim check that has been torn off.

Mr. LIEBELER. There isn't any way you can tell from the number when the
check was issued?

Mr. GREENER. No, because we got the tags dumped into a box, and we
reach in and get a tag and tie it onto the merchandise and fill it out.

Mr. LIEBELER. I want to show you some pictures that have previously
been marked in another part of these proceedings as Commission Exhibits
Nos. 451, 453, 454, 455, and 456, and ask you if you recall ever seeing
the person or persons depicted in these pictures?

Mr. GREENER. No; I don't believe I could identify him as ever having
any dealings. Now there is a familiarity there, but I couldn't tie it
with anything or anybody.

Mr. LIEBELER. You couldn't figure out in your mind why you think there
is a familiarity to those pictures?

Mr. GREENER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Had you ever seen those pictures before?

Mr. GREENER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Has the FBI or Dallas Police Department ever shown you
pictures and asked you to identify them?

Mr. GREENER. No; they haven't shown me pictures of anyone for
identification.

Mr. LIEBELER. I want to show you another picture which is a photograph
that has been marked Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-B, a photograph of an
individual on a street, and one of them has been indicated by a green
mark on the picture, and ask you to examine that picture and tell me if
you have ever seen that man before?

Mr. GREENER. Not that I can recall now.

Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another photograph of a street scene which has
been marked Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-A, and ask you if you recognize any
of the people in that photograph? Two of them have been marked with a
green marker, but don't confine your attention entirely to those two
individuals. Tell me if you recognize any of the people in that picture?

Mr. GREENER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Particularly I call your attention to the man who was
standing immediately to the left of the man who is marked with the "X,"
rather than the line, not immediately, to the left of him, then, but
the second man to the left. He is standing there with a tie and he has
some papers in his hand. Does he look familiar to you at all?

Mr. GREENER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another picture that has been marked Pizzo
Exhibit No. 453-C, and ask you if you can recall ever having seen that
man?

Mr. GREENER. I don't recall.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recognize that man in the picture?

Mr. GREENER. According to the other pictures in the paper, yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Who does it look like to you?

Mr. GREENER. It looks like Oswald.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you don't ever remember having seen him?

Mr. GREENER. No; my mental pictures are not hardly as good as it used
to be. You take fooling with people day in and day out, without some
reason to recognize them, the next time you see them--there is a reason
for it, you don't make a mental picture of every person that comes in.
If he was 6'6" and weighed 300 pounds, or gave you some trouble when he
comes for his merchandise, then it is likely you would remember, but
a guy just comes in and tells you what he wants done, and comes back,
and gets his merchandise and doesn't give you any trouble, then you
don't remember. Usually I never forget a face. Now, the first picture
you showed me, there was something there, but I couldn't pin it to
anything, though.

Mr. LIEBELER. I am marking two photographs of a rifle as Exhibits
Nos. 3 and 4, on the deposition of Mr. Greener. I have initialed both
photographs for the purpose of identification, and I would like to have
you initial them, too, so we don't get confused as to which picture we
are looking at.

Mr. GREENER. Both of them?

Mr. LIEBELER. Both of them, please. These are pictures of a rifle. I
would like to have you examine it and tell me whether you have ever
seen that rifle or one similar to it.

Mr. GREENER. No; I don't remember this rifle at all. The first Italian
rifle that I remember seeing was in Worland, Wyo. A friend pulled his
out, and that is the first Italian rifle that I ever recall having seen.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was that subsequent to the assassination?

Mr. GREENER. That was while we were on the trip.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember ever having seen a rifle like this in the
shop here?

Mr. GREENER. No; I sure don't.

Mr. LIEBELER. I have taken the first two exhibits and marked them
Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2, on your deposition, and I have initialed both of
them and I would like to have you initial them also for the purpose of
identification.

Mr. GREENER. [Initials.]

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you made any attempt on your own part to try to
figure out how this tag came to be in your shop?

Mr. GREENER. No; really I haven't inquired any at all on that. I
inquired about the reporter deal, but I didn't inquire into anything
at all about the tag, because I just assumed it was all open and above
board and didn't go into it at all.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now we have talked previously about the three
possibilities that could possibly explain this tag, and you have told
us that you don't think that Ryder is the kind of guy who would write
the tag up after the fact just to cause a commotion.

There are two other possibilities. One, was that Lee Oswald had a
different rifle in here. And the other is that there is a different
Oswald involved. Do you have any opinion as to which of those
possibilities might be correct?

Mr. GREENER. No; it would just be a----

Mr. LIEBELER. Wild speculation?

Mr. GREENER. Very wild. Very wild speculation.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, you told me before that you had been interviewed
several times by the FBI and by the Dallas police force. Can you think
of any questions that they asked you or things they discussed with you
that we haven't covered here?

Mr. GREENER. No; I can't. It seems that we have gone into it far deeper
than they ever did, the Dallas police or the FBI.

Mr. LIEBELER. Can you think of anything else that I should have asked
you or that you can add that would help clear this situation up?

Mr. GREENER. No; sure can't.

Mr. LIEBELER. I have no further questions at this point, Mr. Greener.
If you can't think of anything else that you think is appropriate to
add to the record, I think we will terminate the deposition at this
point. I want to thank you very much for the time you have given and
the cooperation you have shown. I know you have been talked to about
this a lot of times. I appreciate the cooperation you have shown the
Commission, and I thank you very much.

Mr. GREENER. We have tried to cooperate with them all the way through.
When they continued to come back and ask the same questions and get me
out of bed and all at 11 or 12 o'clock at night and get a tag they had
looked at three or four times, I began to get a little bit aggravated.

Mr. Ryder and I have always been interested in helping them in any way
we could with any information we could give. I don't feel that he is
the type boy to do that. Of course, that again is people are involved.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, you have known the boy a long time and you should
be in a position to make that kind of judgment?

Mr. GREENER. That is what he is. He has been a mighty fine boy and he
is just an extraordinary boy. There is not many like him, and I would
trust him with anything that I have to be done, and it just never
struck me as him being that kind of boy.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let me ask you a couple of other questions about rifles
and sights. I know you do have a meeting at 12:30.

Mr. GREENER. No; it was 12.

Mr. LIEBELER. I thought it was 12:30. I am sorry you are not going
to make the meeting. You may have read in the newspapers that Oswald
purchased this Italian rifle, or was supposed to have purchased it from
a mail-order house in Chicago, with the telescopic sight mounted on the
rifle at that time?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. In your opinion, based on your experience in this field,
do you think that a rifle that had been purchased from a mail-order
house that is shipped through the mails with a scope mounted on it
would be in a condition to fire accurately at that point without any
further sighting in of the rifle by firing it?

Mr. GREENER. The possibility of it being, especially with this
frail mount is, I am sure that that mount, according to what little
information I have, the possibility of it being real accurate would be
pretty small, I think.

I think the gun would be--I think even a fellow that was going to go
deer hunting would want to take the gun out and shoot it before he went
hunting, and I think that holds very true with this case, regardless of
whether we mounted the scope or who mounted it or it come mounted. I
think the man would fire it before using it.

Mr. LIEBELER. You feel that because you don't think that a rifle would
be able to be fired accurately unless it had been sighted?

Mr. GREENER. The possibility would be small that it would be real
accurate; and you talk to most any of the fellows that go hunting,
regardless of how expensive a mount they may have on the gun, he is
going to take it and fire it before he goes hunting. That holds true in
99 percent of the cases.

The only reason not to would be the fact the man was in a real big
hurry, he picked it up late in the afternoon and he was going to
Colorado and was getting there after the season and he was going to
shoot and just take his chances. Otherwise, he would take the gun out
and fire it, 99 out of 100, and fire it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would that be true even if it had been boresighted?

Mr. GREENER. Yes; because actually the boresighting with the tools that
we use, the accuracy of the thing on the windage part of it is very
accurate, but as far as distance, different guns will travel a flatter
trajectory than other guns will, and there is no calibration on the
sighting tools that tell us that you can sight the gun in on target,
that it is on 60 or 140 or 270 or 308. There is no calibration for that.

Mr. LIEBELER. No calibration for the boresighting machine?

Mr. GREENER. No; you have the crosshairs and you line the two of them
up, and that is approximately 100 or 125 yards range, but different
guns will vary as to the trajectory, and one might hit the target and
one be a little high and another a little low, so that is the reason
the man takes his gun and shoots it in as far as the elevation is
concerned. He can zero it in to what distance he wants to shoot it at.

Mr. LIEBELER. That would have to be done, as you have indicated, even
if the rifle had been boresighted?

Mr. GREENER. That's right. It would be accurate as far as elevation.
The windage part is usually right on target, but the elevation has to
do with caliber.

As far as your 6.5 Italian gun is concerned, there is only two types.
One is the hand load, and one is the military ammunition. Because there
is none of the major ammunition manufacturers that builds a sporting
load for that gun, so it either has to be a hand load or old Italian or
military ammunition, and the hand load has to do with what size bullet
and the power you get, and it would be more important on that gun to
shoot it than it would any other caliber or of an American make that
you get your larger manufacturers of ammunition loading for.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any 6.5 ammunition in your shop?

Mr. GREENER. Not 6.5 Italian.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever had?

Mr. GREENER. We have a 6.5 Swedish and 6.5 Jap, and I believe that is
all of these 6.5's.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you do reloading of casings?

Mr. GREENER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. The fellow has to do that himself?

Mr. GREENER. We sell the components and the loading equipment but we
don't do any loading. The only one that I have been able to find out so
far that hand loads 6.5 Italian--I don't think this is a possibility,
but Ray Acker with Bell Telephone is the only one I know that does any
hand loading on 6.5 Italians.

Mr. LIEBELER. He works for Bell Telephone Co.?

Mr. GREENER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. He does this as a part-time occupation?

Mr. GREENER. Hobby; yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you talked to him about this case at all?

Mr. GREENER. No; I don't guess I have ever called him. How I came to
know that he reloads, and I don't know to what extent that he reloads,
but I called one of my suppliers as to the availability of 6.5 Italian,
and he gave me his name, so that is the reason but I can't say, but as
far as I know, he is the only one that loads 6.5. There may be others
that buy their own dies and hand loading, more especially since there
are more guns coming out, but that would be, oh, a year and a half ago
when I was told that he hand loaded 6.5 Italians.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you need a particular kind of equipment to reload
shells?

Mr. GREENER. Very definitely.

Mr. LIEBELER. Does the equipment vary with the caliber of the shell?

Mr. GREENER. Very definitely. The presses usually will accept all the
different calibers, and then you have to have your die sets.

Mr. LIEBELER. To pour it?

Mr. GREENER. You've got to have your shell holders, and your die holder
that resizes the brass and inserts the bullet into it, the bullet
seating and there is only one caliber that one set of dies will load.
If you load a 6.5 die, you have to have 6.5 dies. If you load .30-06,
you have to have .30-06, and you can't have any part of the two on the
different calibers of ammunition.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, thank you again, and we appreciate your cooperation.



TESTIMONY OF GERTRUDE HUNTER

The testimony of Gertrude Hunter, was taken at 5:50 p.m., on July 22,
1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building,
Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler,
assistant counsel of the President's Commission.


Mr. LIEBELER. Mrs. Hunter, would you stand please and take the oath.

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mrs. HUNTER. I do.

Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am an attorney on the
staff of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President
Kennedy. I have been authorized to take your testimony by the
Commission pursuant to authority granted to it by Executive Order No.
11130, dated November 29, 1963, and joint resolution of Congress No.
137.

Pursuant to the rules governing the taking of testimony by the
Commission, you are entitled to have an attorney here if you wish
and you are entitled to 3-days' notice of the hearing. You are not
required to answer at this time any questions that you think might be
incriminating or involve some other privilege, of course. Most of the
witnesses don't have an attorney and I see you don't have one here so
I assume you want to proceed with the questioning without an attorney
being present, is that correct?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you state your name for the record, please?

Mrs. HUNTER. Gertrude Hunter.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live, Mrs. Hunter?

Mrs. HUNTER. 141 South Hastings, Irving, Tex.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you lived in Irving?

Mrs. HUNTER. I think it was 2 years the 14th of July--right at--between
the 8th and 14th--I don't know the exact dates, but it was 2 years.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you married, Mrs. Hunter?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any children?

Mrs. HUNTER. Four girls.

Mr. LIEBELER. How old are they?

Mrs. HUNTER. Twenty-five, twenty-one, nineteen, and sixteen.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you born?

Mrs. HUNTER. Jacksonville, Tex.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you have lived most of your life in Texas?

Mrs. HUNTER. Oh, yes; all my life.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Mrs. Edith Whitworth?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you known her?

Mrs. HUNTER. Oh, ever since I came to Irving. We are football fans
together.

Mr. LIEBELER. You came to Irving about 2 years ago?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; in July.

Mr. LIEBELER. It appears from information that has been provided to us
by the FBI that you were in a store operated by Mrs. Whitworth sometime
in 1963--that was formerly operated by Mrs. Whitworth--at which time
people who you now believe to be Lee Harvey Oswald and his wife and
children came into the store, is that correct?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us all the circumstances surrounding that
event as best you can remember them?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, it was after 2 o'clock and I had went down to talk
to her--we were planning on a football trip and we were just sitting
there in the store talking, discussing football games, and who was
going with who and all, and this man drove up out in front of the store
and he got out and he come in and he asked for a gunsmith.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see the car drive up?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see who was driving it?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was this man driving it?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. How many people were in the car?

Mrs. HUNTER. Just him and a woman and two children.

Mr. LIEBELER. Nobody else?

Mrs. HUNTER. No one else.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are quite sure about that?

Mrs. HUNTER. I'm positive, because I was sitting right there--I was
sitting this way and the door was right here [indicating], and he drove
cater-cornered up.

Mr. LIEBELER. And there are glass windows in the front of the store so
that you could see right out into the street?

Mrs. HUNTER. It is a solid glass there and the door was standing open
there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know about what kind of car it was?

Mrs. HUNTER. Now, the reason I'm definite about the car--a friend of
mine in Houston--I was looking for them up and they had a car just
like this and I had left a note on my mailbox that I would be at this
place--telling them if anyone come I would be at this place and when
they drove up I thought that was them and it was a two-tone blue Ford.

Mr. LIEBELER. What year?

Mrs. HUNTER. 1957 or 1958--I won't be positive about that, but I would
rather say it was about a 1957, I think.

Mr. LIEBELER. From which direction did this car drive up?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, now, where the car come from--I don't know whether
it come up Jefferson or down Irving Boulevard, but I know that it did
park into the front of the store where I was sitting, you know, I was
talking and I wasn't paying any attention to which way the car came
from. The only thing I seen is the driver, when he drove up, and I seen
the color of the car, I started to get up because I thought it was
my friends from Houston, and I looked and seen that it wasn't and he
just got out and come in. She didn't get out at that time. He come in
and asked for the gunsmith, and to the best of my knowledge, I'm not
positive, but it seems to me like, because I was thinking that so many
different times that they would come in--whether he had something in
his hand or whether he didn't, but I know he went back to the car, and
if he did, he put it in the car and when he come back in, she got out
and followed him in, but he didn't help her out of the car, he didn't
help her with the kids or nothing. She just followed him in.

Mr. LIEBELER. Is the furniture store that Mrs. Whitworth operated at
that time at the intersection of Jefferson Street and Irving Boulevard,
is that right?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; you come right in to Jefferson and Irving Boulevard.
It used to be the bus station--the Continental Bus Station.

Mr. LIEBELER. And they had diagonal parking on that street? Is that the
way you parked?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, you see, it was where the buses used to park clean
off the street to get out of the way of the traffic, you see, and you
just come up with the nose right up and you would be out of the traffic.

Mr. LIEBELER. Out of the main street?

Mrs. HUNTER. Just like this here was the store [indicating], well, it
was over this way and he just kind of cater-cornered up this way.

Mr. LIEBELER. So, he parked his car diagonally in front of the store
and got out and came in?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. What happened after he went back out and they came back
into the store?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, he just come in and she was over when her desk was
there and he asked her about some furniture or something and they
walked and went back to the back and this woman, she followed them and
this young baby and the new baby.

Mr. LIEBELER. This man asked Mrs. Whitworth about some furniture?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And Mrs. Whitworth and this man walked toward the back of
the store and the woman and the children followed them; is that right?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; but she wasn't--now, listen, she didn't pay any
attention and this lady had had a new grandbaby.

Mr. LIEBELER. You mean Mrs. Whitworth?

Mrs. HUNTER. Mrs. Whitworth's daughter and she says, "Let me trade you
a boy for this girl and we will both have a boy and girl." Well, they
didn't offer to show the baby or nothing and she didn't say anything.
We thought it was very funny and we discussed it after she walked
out--about her not being interested in showing her new baby, and, of
course, I didn't say anything to them, only I did see the little girl
and so forth. I didn't put my hands on her or nothing and I didn't pay
any attention to what they were saying at the back. All I know is that
they were looking at some furniture there, back there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did this man Oswald say anything about how old the little
baby was?

Mrs. HUNTER. He said something to her but he was back far enough
that what he said to her--I don't know--it was about 2 weeks old or
something like that.

Mr. LIEBELER. This is Mrs. Whitworth you are talking about now, or
Oswald?

Mrs. HUNTER. Oswald; and she asked Oswald something about the babies
and I don't remember just what he said to her, but it was something
about the baby, you know, and he didn't seem too enthused about that
either.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you didn't hear Oswald say anything to Mrs. Whitworth
about how old the baby was?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, I won't be positive--it's been so long--just what he
answered her, but just not looking for nothing--I didn't say too much
about it, but we just thought it was a coincidence about him not being
interested in us seeing the new baby. I think he did tell her when it
was born; I'm not positive.

Mr. LIEBELER. Can you fix for us the date on which this occurred?

Mrs. HUNTER. Oh, no; not right offhand. All I know is that it was
before the football game--I believe the Richland Hills football game
and it was on a Wednesday or a Thursday--I won't say positive which one.

Mr. LIEBELER. How can you say it was on a Wednesday or Thursday?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, I never did go down to the store only on Wednesdays
or Thursdays afternoons---only the days that we had charters, and I
went down on Friday afternoon.

Mr. LIEBELER. On the days you had charters; what do you mean by that?

Mrs. HUNTER. Charter buses to go.

Mr. LIEBELER. To go to the football game?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have a charter bus to go to the football game at
Richland Hills?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; we went in cars that night and that night I would
always wait until my daughter calls at 2 o'clock. When she would call,
then I would go down to the store and that's the reason I definitely
know it was after 2 o'clock.

Mr. LIEBELER. Which daughter is this that you are talking about?

Mrs. HUNTER. Glenda.

Mr. LIEBELER. And what is her last name?

Mrs. HUNTER. Hunter.

Mr. LIEBELER. How old is she?

Mrs. HUNTER. She's 19.

Mr. LIEBELER. And does she live with you at home?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. How does it come that she calls you at 2 o'clock?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, her lunch break--she gets her lunch break from 1
until 2 and she would always call me just a minute or two before she
goes back to work--just a few seconds--every day before she goes to
work.

Mr. LIEBELER. Does she work here in Dallas?

Mrs. HUNTER. At Commercial Title.

Mr. LIEBELER. She always calls you at about 2 o'clock; is that right?

Mrs. HUNTER. Between--she has to be back at her desk at 2. She will
call me anywhere, you know, when it's handy--if she comes up in town
to eat, it may be about 10 minutes until 2. If she takes her lunch and
eats there, it may be 15 minutes to 2, but I would always wait--I would
give her a chance to call me before I would leave and I never would
leave before 2 o'clock.

Mr. LIEBELER. How late in the afternoon could it have been, you think,
that these people did come?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, I would say between 2:30 and 3:30, because I never
did stay gone past 4 o'clock. My daughter comes in from school and she
didn't have any way to get in the house. I locked the house and she
would get to the house before 4 and I would try to be back at the house
before 4 and there was just one or two evenings that I didn't get to
the house before she come in.

Mr. LIEBELER. You say you would always try to get back home by 4
o'clock?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; so I could unlock the door.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you hear the conversation between Mrs. Whitworth and
this man who came in about the gun?

Mrs. HUNTER. He just asked for the gunsmith and she told him the
gunsmith had moved down the street and she went out in front and
pointed down to where to go and told him where to go and showed him
where it was at. I didn't go out the door. I was just sitting in a
platform rocker and he thanked her and he just went back to the car.

Mr. LIEBELER. And after he went back to the car, then, they all came
back again and went in the store?

Mrs. HUNTER. He came back in and then her and the children got out and
followed him in.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know whether Mrs. Whitworth told him where the
gunshop that used to be in the furniture store had moved or did she
direct him to another gunshop?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; she told him that this man had gone and she thought he
was down in those sport shops or some kind of a shop down the street,
or that there was one down there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you familiar with where it is?

Mrs. HUNTER. She was over at the front and I was back here, but I heard
the conversation, you know, what he was asking for and all that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether he had anything in his hands when
he came in?

Mrs. HUNTER. It seems to me like--I'm not positive--that he had
something and it come to me that it was wrapped in brown paper. Now,
I'm not positive about that, but it was just something like you
handle--he didn't have it up in his arms--he just had it in his hands.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any idea how long the package was, or do you
remember that clearly?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I just remember there was something in his hands.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know where the Irving Sport Shop is located?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I sure don't--I have never been there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Mr. Woodrow Greener?

Mrs. HUNTER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Dial Ryder?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I don't know too many people, I guess, you would call
me selfish, but I don't know too many people in Irving--period. There
are just a very few that I know--just the grocery store where we trade
and the man that runs the bus station and Mrs. Whitworth and one or two
I met going to the football games--I have been there 2 years.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anybody else in the store during the time these
people were there?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; just me and her.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mrs. Oswald say anything while she was in the store?

Mrs. HUNTER. I never did hear her open her mouth.

Mr. LIEBELER. How did the little girl, the 2-year-old, behave? Was she
well behaved?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; she just went along holding her her mother's
dresstail. He didn't help her with either one of the babies and she was
walking along. You know, she is kind of shy and it was in a strange
place and she was kind of holding to her mother's coattail when they
were up there where I was at--where the table went around and I don't
know--I just--they was kind of dressed bummy or something--I don't know
what you would call it. She was kind of clean. He looked pretty nice.
I just thought--why was she dressed like that--you know how you will
notice that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you hear the little girl say anything at all to her
mother or her father?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I didn't hear her say anything. Now, when they went
down the aisle, nearly to where Mrs. Whitworth and this man was, she
looked down at her and said something, but I didn't understand what she
said. She kind of whispered it to her. Now, I don't know what she said
or--she said shhh--or something like that to her--I didn't understand,
but she did look down.

Mr. LIEBELER. The mother did look down to the little girl?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long were these people in the store altogether--the
family in the store altogether?

Mrs. HUNTER. Oh, I don't know--I would be scared to say about that,
because, not expecting anything--they come and went so much in there--I
didn't pay no attention to about how long they was in there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Were you along with them when they were looking at the
furniture?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I was sitting in the platform rocker.

Mr. LIEBELER. But the woman went back and looked at furniture with her
husband?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; she didn't--that's what I say--she just walked along
there and she didn't pay that furniture any mind.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any feeling that there was any argument
going on between them or hostility between them or anything like that?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, now, I just think to myself--what is he looking at
that for, she isn't interested. That's just the opinion that I got.

Mr. LIEBELER. You thought he seemed to be much more interested in the
furniture than she did?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did it seem strange to you that these people were in the
store there for the period of time that they were and there was not a
single word exchanged between this man and woman?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I didn't think nothing about that. I don't know--I
don't pay too much attention to anything like that, because while they
were back there, I got up and got out of my chair before they went back
to the car and walked to the door, and was standing looking out the
door up toward the bus that comes in for people to get off of, and I
didn't pay them any more mind until they went out to get in the car.

Mr. LIEBELER. So, they went out and got in the car and what happened
then?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, when they got in the car--he said something to her,
but I couldn't hear that because I was standing in the door and he
turned like he was going to go back down that way and I said, "Don't
go that way, it's a one-way street, you'll have to go through the red
light and turn left." And he looked at me and he didn't say thank
you or nothing and he just backed out and went on down and I watched
him--he turned at the red light--turned down Main Street.

Mr. LIEBELER. He drove east down Irving Boulevard; is that right?

Mrs. HUNTER. He was going down toward Plymouth Park, I believe it was
west--it's a one-way street and you have to go out and come down south.

Mr. LIEBELER. Which way does Irving Boulevard run--it runs east and
west, doesn't it?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; I would say that it did.

Mr. LIEBELER. And it's a one-way street, and it's a one-way street
running toward the west; is it not?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. So, that he got into the car----

Mrs. HUNTER. He got in the car and backed out here and he acted like
he was going to turn this way and I said, "Uh-uh, don't go back that
way, that's a one-way street and you will have to go down here to the
red light and turn to the left," and he went down and turned down Main
Street to the left.

Mr. LIEBELER. He went down the street against the traffic, going the
wrong direction?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; he went down with the traffic, down toward Plymouth
Park. I would say he drove west with the one-way traffic. He was going
to go back opposite, and he went on down to the red light on Main
Street and turned to the left. Now, where he went to from there, I
don't know. I didn't pay him any mind because I was standing there
watching some women coming down the street.

Mr. LIEBELER. When you say he was going to go back there--you mean in
the direction of Dallas, don't you?

Mrs. HUNTER. That's what I would figure, because he would have to turn,
unless he thought he was going to turn and go back down Jefferson, if
he come in Jefferson, but I don't know that he come in Jefferson. He
couldn't have done that--he would have gotten a ticket for that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, let's see if we can establish it between ourselves
here, first, for this discussion, which way Irving Boulevard runs. When
you come toward Irving from Dallas, it runs--Irving Boulevard runs in
the direction away from Dallas, doesn't it, toward the west?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, the man got in the car and he drove west in the
direction of the traffic down Irving Boulevard?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And turned at the red light on Main Street?

Mrs. HUNTER. He turned left.

Mr. LIEBELER. He turned left at the intersection of Main and Irving
Boulevard?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And that's the last you saw of the car?

Mrs. HUNTER. That's the last I seen of it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did this man seem to have any difficulty driving the car
as far as you could tell?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; not that I could tell.

Mr. LIEBELER. You have discussed this whole question, I am sure, with
Mrs. Whitworth from time to time since it happened, haven't you?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, not too much. When they come on television and we
noticed who it was--I don't know--let me see if I can remember the
first time I seen him on television--I wasn't watching it when the
President got killed and I didn't know anything about it until way
after it happened.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did you first get the idea that those people that
had been in the store were the Oswalds?

Mrs. HUNTER. When I seen them on television, and I just says to
whatever was sitting there, I said, "That man was down in the furniture
store the other day."

Mr. LIEBELER. Who was it in the room?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, it was just one of the kids I don't know--I forgot
now which one of them it was, but we were sitting in the house and I
said, "That man on television was down at the furniture store the other
day," and it was after he got killed that they showed her, I believe,
and I recognized her.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you recognize these people as soon as you saw them
and prior to the time you discussed it with Mrs. Whitworth?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, now, I don't know just how soon--I couldn't be
positive just how quick now--I done forgot--that I talked to her after
that, but it was after I seen him on television that we discussed it a
little bit and all, because after they fixed her up, she was pretty and
we did discuss that--the difference she looks now and her down there in
the store.

Mr. LIEBELER. You mean she does--you think she does look different now?

Mrs. HUNTER. Oh, yes; she's pretty now. She looked awful down there in
that store.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think you would recognize her as the same person
if you saw her again?

Mrs. HUNTER. I doubt it--very seriously.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't think you would recognize her?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I sure don't, not from the way she looked in that
store that day and the way she looks now. Now, that's how much
difference there was and I generally notice anyone by their eyes
quicker than anything else.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did you notice that she looked different?

Mrs. HUNTER. Oh--it was----

Mr. LIEBELER. Is that when you saw her on television after the
assassination?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; the first time I seen her, she looked just common,
just like she did down there at the store that day, and I guess it was
when they fixed her up--it must have been after the funeral and she
was meeting with these people or something, because it was quite a
discussion about how pretty she was and why she let herself go before,
because we had discussed it that maybe he didn't want her to fix up or
something.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long was it after the assassination that you noticed
this difference between Marina Oswald as she appeared on television and
in the paper?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, now, you may think I'm funny, but I didn't pay no
attention at all to that television--my television wasn't on when he
got killed or the parade or nothing. I was sitting at the table and
after it happened, I wouldn't watch the television--I didn't watch none
of the burial procedures or anything--any of that.

Mr. LIEBELER. But at some point you noticed that Marina Oswald looked
different than she had the day she was in the store?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. My question is, when did you first notice that?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, it was undoubtedly quite a few days or several days
after Oswald--after Jack Ruby killed Oswald.

Mr. LIEBELER. As much as a week after that?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well--it was just after that--I wouldn't say just definite
what time it was, because, you don't notice anything like that.
Naturally, it's going to pop in your mind when you do notice something
like that, but just as soon as I seen her fixed up on TV, I just
noticed it was quite a difference of how she looked then and before.

Mr. LIEBELER. You think it was within a week after the time Ruby shot
Oswald, is that right?

Mrs. HUNTER. I wouldn't say--not now, it has been too long ago.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you now do have some doubt in your mind after having
seen her as to whether you would even recognize her as the same person
that was in the store, is that right?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, with the way her features looked on television now
and the way I seen her in the store--yes; because she dresses nice and
she's real cute. She dresses cute and she was sloppy in the store that
day.

Mr. LIEBELER. Her face hasn't changed any, has it, she has the same
face.

Mrs. HUNTER. Oh, her hair makes a difference now. I might recognize
her--I wouldn't say I wouldn't or I would, but I don't know--I've made
the remark two or three times that she doesn't look like she did the
day I seen her in the store.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you still don't have any doubt in your mind that it
actually was she that was in the store the day you saw her?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, I will say this, that the one I seen in the store
and the first time I seen her on television the first time was the same
woman--let's put it that way.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever tell anybody that Oswald actually turned
down Irving Boulevard and went against the traffic when he came out of
the store and went against the traffic?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, no; I didn't tell them that he went east. I told
them he started to turn east and I told him he was going the wrong
direction and he would have to turn back. Now, that woman from England
that came here--

Mr. LIEBELER. Were you there that day she came?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; she come to my house that night.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember what you told her about that?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, just the same thing--about the same thing I have
told you, because that's about all I know. I might have remembered
a few different little points then that have slipped my mind now,
but that's just like what I told you, I guess a few little ends and
odds have slipped, but that's just about all I know, because I wasn't
expecting that and I wasn't looking for nothing like that and I just
didn't think too much about it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mrs. Whitworth see these people get in the car and
drive away, do you know?

Mrs. HUNTER. I don't know, because she was on that side where they come
out and I was on this--at a door standing in the door.

Mr. LIEBELER. You were closer to the door than Mrs. Whitworth?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I was closer to the car than she was. She was back
down here where they generally went into the store.

Mr. LIEBELER. She was further away from the front door where the car
was parked than you were?

Mrs. HUNTER. Now, I don't know whether she was in the door or not. I
have never discussed it with her.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you have never told Mrs. Whitworth that this man got
in the car and drove the wrong way down the street?

Mrs. HUNTER. The only thing that--I says, "He started to go back down
Irving Boulevard." I did say that to her one day because it was a
one-way street and he was going the wrong way then.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think if we have Mrs. Oswald come in here next
Friday morning and you come in and look at her and the children too, do
you think you would be able to come here and tell us if they were the
people that were in that store?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, I wouldn't say--I just wouldn't say.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, we have asked Mrs. Whitworth to come in--to come
back Friday morning at 9 o'clock and we will have Mrs. Oswald and the
babies come in and we would like for you to come back to see if they
were the people in the store. Would you be willing to do that?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; I will be willing to do it, but now, it's like I
say--I wouldn't say I would recognize her now because she is pretty now.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think she would recognize you, do you think she
would remember being in the store if she had really been in there?

Mrs. HUNTER. I wouldn't know that--that's her--I don't know because I
never did interfere with the people that come in there to do business
with her or I I never did say anything to them and I never did answer
her telephone or nothing at that business. I was just sitting in there
talking to her.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let me suspend with the questioning now, Mrs. Hunter,
until Friday morning.

Mrs. HUNTER. This Friday morning?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; day after tomorrow. You and Mrs. Whitworth can come
back at that time and we will bring Mrs. Oswald here.

Mrs. HUNTER. That's all right. She is pretty now but she wasn't then.

Mr. LIEBELER. Before you go, I want to show you some pictures here and
ask you if you recognize any of the people in them. I show you Pizzo
Exhibit No. 453-A and ask if you recognize anybody in that picture.

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, just not offhand--not, no; I don't.

Mr. LIEBELER. I will ask you the same question with regard to Pizzo
Exhibit No. 453-B.

Mrs. HUNTER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't recognize anybody in that picture?

Mrs. HUNTER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. The same question with respect to Bringuier Exhibit No. 1.

Mrs. HUNTER. No; not dressed like that--I don't.

Mr. LIEBELER. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 177 and ask if you
recognize anybody in that picture.

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are pointing to a woman that's holding a child.

Mrs. HUNTER. I don't know what she's holding--I can't tell that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Anyway, there is a woman sitting there in a chair?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. As we face the picture, it's on the farthest left, is
that right, and who is that?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, that looks like her a little bit--but she's got her
hair fixed still different than she had it in the store that day.

Mr. LIEBELER. What about the man sitting right next to her, does he
look like the man that was in the store that day?

Mrs. HUNTER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't think he resembles the man that was in the
store?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; that's not him, and that's Mrs. Oswald. That may be
a brother, but that's not him. I never did see his brother because I
didn't watch none of that. I just didn't want to live with it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, I show you a picture that has been marked Garner
Exhibit No. 1 and ask you if that looks like anybody you have ever seen
before.

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, now, looking from up this way it could be--from here
up--it could be.

Mr. LIEBELER. You think that that resembles the man who was in the
store somewhat?

Mrs. HUNTER. I would say he's kind of built that way.

Mr. LIEBELER. What about Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-C, does that look like
the man who was in the store?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, it could look like him some, but he was not dressed
that way.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are not sure that that was him?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I wouldn't say it was with him dressed that way
because I didn't have that much hankering to really tell what he
really looked like and it has been so long since I've seen it on the
television that I wouldn't guarantee that--not looking for nothing.

Mr. LIEBELER. All right, thank you very much. We will see you on Friday.



TESTIMONY OF EDITH WHITWORTH

The testimony of Edith Whitworth was taken at 5 p.m., on July 22, 1964,
in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan
and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant
counsel of the President's Commission.


Mr. LIEBELER. Would you stand and take the oath, please?

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I do.

Mr. LIEBELER. My name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am an attorney on the
staff of the President's Commission investigating the assassination of
President Kennedy. I have been authorized to take your testimony by the
Commission pursuant to authority granted to it by Executive Order No.
11130, dated November 29, 1963, and by joint resolution of Congress No.
137.

Under the Commission's rules relating to the taking of testimony by
the Commission, you are entitled to have an attorney present at this
or any other hearing at which you may appear before the Commission
and you are entitled to 3-days' notice of your appearance here. You
are also entitled to exercise the usual privileges with regard to
self incrimination and so forth as far as not answering questions is
concerned. I assume that since you are here without an attorney, that
you do not wish to have your attorney present at the session. In fact,
very few witnesses do have their attorneys present. Am I correct in
that understanding?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, I assume that--I don't see any use of me having
one.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you state your name for the record?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. My name is Edith Whitworth.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you live?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I live at 315 South Jefferson, Irving, Tex.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you are married; is that correct?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. How many children do you have?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I have two.

Mr. LIEBELER. Approximately how old are they?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. My daughter is 24 years old and my son 19 years old.

Mr. LIEBELER. When were they born?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. My daughter was born May 13, 1940, and my son was born
May 20, 1945.

Mr. LIEBELER. Your daughter is also married, is she not?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; she is.

Mr. LIEBELER. What is her married name?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Her married name--her husband's name is Bobby Gene
Hollaway, and her name is Joyce.

Mr. LIEBELER. It's spelled [spelling] H-o-l-l-a-w-a-y, is that correct?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do they have any children?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. They have two children.

Mr. LIEBELER. How old are they, and when were they born?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. The first one--Bryan will be 3 years old the 20th of
October, I think I'm right on that; and the other one was born the 10th
day of last October--he will be 1 year old.

Mr. LIEBELER. The youngest one was born when?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Wait--I said the 20th of October--I believe that oldest
one is the 28th of October--I am sorry.

Mr. LIEBELER. What is the name of the older child?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Bryan Douglas.

Mr. LIEBELER. You say he was born on what date?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I believe it was October 28.

Mr. LIEBELER. What year?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. And he will be 3 years old this October--he was 2 last
year--that will be 1961, wouldn't it?

Mr. LIEBELER. The other child's name is what?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Jeffery Lynn. He was born October 10, 1963. You got
me on those birthdays--I have forgotten them. I believe October 28 is
right--I'm not just real sure.

Mr. LIEBELER. It is my understanding that you formerly operated a used
furniture store in Irving, Tex.; is that right?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; I did until about the 25th day of January of this
year.

Mr. LIEBELER. What was the name of that store?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Furniture Mart.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where was it located?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. 149 East Irving Boulevard.

Mr. LIEBELER. Irving Boulevard runs east and west, does it not?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; it does.

Mr. LIEBELER. Which side of the street is the furniture store on?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. That would be on the right-hand side going west.

Mr. LIEBELER. Going away from Dallas or toward Dallas?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Going west.

Mr. LIEBELER. That would be the north side?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. The north side; yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. The FBI has advised us that you have told them that
some time during 1963, you believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was in your
furniture store; is that right?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; it is.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell me all the circumstances surrounding that
event, to the best of your recollection?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, as far as the date, I couldn't, you know, say
that it was any day--any special day, but it was along the first of
November. We had, you know, a discussion about the babies--that's the
reason you have that there about my baby--my grandchildren, and their
children. They had the baby with them at that time. We had at one time
had a gun shop in there. We had a gunsmith sign out in front and I
presume he had came up and saw that sign there and he stopped and came
in. We have two doors in this place of business--one was on the west
side and the west end, and one on the east end. He had pulled up there
at the front as well as I remember and he walked around his car and
came into the west door.

Mr. LIEBELER. You saw him drive up in the car?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; because it was all glass in front and I was
sitting at the--well, it's the cash stand--we call it there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Which direction was he driving the car at that time?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. He was driving west on a one-way street--that's a one
way there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Running from east to west?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. East to west.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of a car did he have, Mrs. Whitworth?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, as far as I can remember--I wouldn't be--I
wouldn't say for sure. All I can say is that I believe, you know, not
paying a lot of attention to the car and the car not meaning anything
at that time, that it was a two-tone blue and white. It was either a
Ford or a Plymouth. Now, I wouldn't swear to that, but it was either
one--the car didn't mean anything to me at that time. Anyway, he came
in and he stood----

Mr. LIEBELER. Let me ask you some questions about the car first--how
many people were in the car when you saw it drive up?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I didn't pay any attention to it--just really when it
drove up out there. When I did pay attention to it was when he got back
in it, you know, and it was faintly, you know. As to them getting back
in it, I wouldn't say that there was anyone else in it--I wouldn't say
that they were the only ones that was in it. They were the only ones
that come in the store.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you notice specifically that Oswald was driving?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I wouldn't say that he was, and I wouldn't say that
he drove off in the car. I wouldn't say that, because, like I say, it
didn't mean anything to me at that time, just faintly, I would say that
that car was blue and white, two-tone, and that it was either a Ford or
a Plymouth--now, I wouldn't swear to that.

Mr. LIEBELER. So, he drove up in front of the store and he got out of
the car and came in--which door--did he come in?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. He came in the west door.

Mr. LIEBELER. He came in the west door?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. West door; he came in and he stood right in front of
me there, and I arose up out of my chair and asked him, you know, if
I could help him and he asked for something for a gun, and he had
whatever this was wrapped up and it was about so long, as well as I
can remember, not paying too much attention to it at that time, but
we didn't have the gunshop in there then. It had gone out of business
and I told him, no, I didn't have anything there, and whatever he was
looking for--that I didn't have it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, when you say, "so long," you held your hands up and
how many inches was that--would you hold your hands up again?

Mrs. WHITWORTH [indicating]. I would say it was about like that.

Mr. LIEBELER. How many inches do you think that is?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, I would say about 15 inches.

Mr. LIEBELER. About 15 inches?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. That's what I would say. You know, just judging it.
It could have been longer and it could have been shorter, but it was
wrapped up, I know that.

Mr. LIEBELER. He didn't have occasion to open it up for you while he
was in the store?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, did he ask you about a specific part for it?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; he did. But I don't know what it was because I
didn't pay any attention to it because it was something, you know, for
a gun and I couldn't help him, so I didn't pay any attention to it, you
know, because I never worked in a gunshop anyway and I know nothing
about guns whatever.

Mr. LIEBELER. How come he came into this used furniture shop looking
for a gun part?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, I had a sign--I mean, I had had a gun shop in
there, a man had leased part of my store and he had a gunshop in there,
one part of it, but he had been moved for quite a while, but the sign
hadn't been taken down.

Mr. LIEBELER. So, there was still a sign on the front of the building
saying that there was a gunshop there?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Go ahead and tell me what are the other circumstances?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. And when I told him that I didn't have anything--I
didn't have what he was looking for, but I probably told him where
he could go get it. I don't remember that I did, but I usually would
tell someone where they could go to get such a thing and he turned
around and he looked and he realized, I guess, that it was a furniture
store and he said, "You have furniture in here?" I said, "Yes, I do."
He says, "I'm going to need some in a couple of weeks or so," and I
said, "Well, I'll be glad to show you what I have." I had new and
used furniture and he wanted bedroom furniture, he told me that, and
he turned--he went back to the car and came back in and when he came
back in his wife followed him in with the young baby and the little
girl and we walked straight to the back of the building where I had
the bedroom suites and I showed him the bedroom suites and I told him
about the bedroom suites and I noticed that he would look over to her
and she would never--she never uttered a word and I thought she didn't
like what I had and was uninterested, because I didn't, you know, high
pressure them to sell them.

Mr. LIEBELER. Were they interested in new furniture or used furniture?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, I never did get that far along to find out, you
know, what they wanted, because she acted like she wasn't interested,
you know, and I couldn't talk to him and he was the only one saying
anything, and then we got talking about the babies.

Mr. LIEBELER. What was that conversation about?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, we was comparing the birthdays of the children
and my grandchildren had birthdays kind of similar to theirs, you
know, and so it went even so far as to--I said, "Well, we wanted a
little girl. We wanted one of ours to be a little girl." He said, he
wanted one of his to be a little boy and just jokingly, I said, "Well,
let's just swap then." And, he kind of smiled but she still didn't
say anything, didn't even offer to show us the baby. We didn't know
then, you know, that she couldn't even speak, or probably couldn't
understand what we said, so she walked clear away from us and we walked
back toward the front of the building there and she walked out ahead
of him--the little girl was right in front of her, you know, and this
was the older little girl, and they went on to the car and the little
girl was kind of whining and at one time I thought--well, I'll offer
her a piece of candy. I had candy in there, you know, but I never did,
I never did offer them any candy and they went on off, but it was them
just as sure as I'm sitting here--I'm sure it was him and her too.

Mr. LIEBELER. In this conversation about the babies, did they tell
you--did this man tell you when his little baby had been born?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; it was 2 weeks old.

Mr. LIEBELER. It was 2 weeks old at that time?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And he told you it was 2 weeks old?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you the date on which the baby was born?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. He probably did at that time, but I don't know--the
date on that kind of corresponded with the date of the birthday of my
oldest grandson there.

Mr. LIEBELER. You have no recollection as to whether or not he told
you the date or not; is that correct? Or you just don't remember the
date--do you remember whether he told you or not?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I'm sure that he told me. I just don't remember the
date.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you by saying, "Well, the baby is 2 weeks
old," or did he tell you specifically that the baby was born on such
and such a date; do you remember?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; I wouldn't swear to it, but I'm pretty sure he
told me the date at that time but the baby was 2 weeks old and I judge
that he would have been in the store around the 4th, 5th, or 6th of
November, because we were fixing to go to a ball game, this lady and
I, and I have a son that plays football for Irving High School and we
were going on to the football game and that's how come this lady to be
in there. You know, we were planning to go together or get tickets to
the football game and it had to be along in there--the first week in
November.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, do you remember a specific football game that you
were going to see; is that how you fixed the date as early in November?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us what ball game that would have been?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. It probably was Richland Hills that we were going to.

Mr. LIEBELER. Richland Hills was going to play who?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Irving, and we were going to Richland Hills--that's a
Fort Worth team.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you made any efforts, since this question came up,
to find out the exact date on which the Richland Hills team played the
Irving team, did you go back and look it up?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I probably did at one time, but I couldn't tell you
what the date was now, except that it was a Friday night. It was going
to be on Friday and it was before that Friday. Now, Mrs. Hunter might
be able to tell you that. I didn't go back and try to review anything
before I come over here. At that time, you know, I knew what game it
was, but I haven't reviewed it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did I understand you to say correctly that there was a
friend of yours that was in the store at the time they were there?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. That was Mrs. Hunter?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; Mrs. Hunter.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did I also understand you to say correctly that Mrs.
Hunter was there for the purpose of getting tickets to go to the
football game?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. We were planning a trip, you know, to this football
game.

Mr. LIEBELER. Does Mrs. Hunter ordinarily come into the store?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; she did--I had just begun to know her, you know,
and it all come about through school doings and all, and I usually got
her tickets or she got my tickets when we were going to travel to a
game or so.

Mr. LIEBELER. Can you fix a day of the week any more specifically than
you have as to when this might have occurred?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I couldn't--no; I couldn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mrs. Hunter come in usually on a particular day or
did she just come in from time to time?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, she said she did--for some reason why or other,
but to me, I couldn't fix any certain day, you know, working in the
public like I did and all that. I couldn't, you know, not meaning
anything at that time--I couldn't put a date on it, you know, what
day she come or anything. Usually, the tickets would go on sale on a
Tuesday or Wednesday, if they were going to travel to play, and I have
my tickets to the home games, you know, and she could say what day it
was, but I couldn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was this particular ball game going to be played at
Richland Hills; is that right?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; it was.

Mr. LIEBELER. So you were talking about getting the tickets and were
going on over to Richland Hills?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. To this game.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you said Lee Oswald--the Oswalds were in your store
on the weekend preceding the game?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. It wasn't the weekend.

Mr. LIEBELER. During the week?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. During the week.

Mr. LIEBELER. Right; during the week preceding the weekend on which
Richland Hills played Irving.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember being interviewed by two agents of the
FBI about the middle of December on this whole question?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. On a Saturday; yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; Saturday, December 14, 1963.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I do remember; it was a Saturday that they came out.

Mr. LIEBELER. And do you remember the names of the agents?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; I don't. They were just two tall fellows and I
don't even know the names--I didn't take them down and I didn't think
it was that important.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember telling those two men specifically that
when this man's wife came in, when Oswald's wife came in, that Oswald
told you that his youngest child had been born on October 20, 1963?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Probably so--somewhere, you know, it was along that
time, but you know it has been so long now that I have forgotten the
dates.

Mr. LIEBELER. And do you remember telling the FBI agents specifically
the date October 20, 1963?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I believe so. Now, like I say, I wouldn't swear to that
but if I told them, that's what he had told me. I haven't reviewed
this, like I say, before I come over here, so I'm just telling you what
I think absolutely is true--the truth.

Mr. LIEBELER. Right; and I want to try and find the state of your
recollection as to just what this man told you about the date of birth
of this young child, and if you remember specifically that he told you
that the child was born October 20, 1963, I want you to tell me that,
and if you can't remember that, I want you just to say that and it is
very important that you give me the exact state of your recollection on
that.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Now, I'm not going to say that I remember him telling
me that because it has been too long ago, you know, it has been too
long back to say it was October 20--like when I come over here and you
asked me my grandson's birthday that I had forgotten and there is too
much that goes through my mind in that length of time. We talked about
it and I'm sure he told me the birthdays of the babies, but it has been
too long now and I wouldn't say that he told me October 20, but the
baby was 2 weeks old when he was in the store and it was the first week
in November that he was in the store and I don't know what date that
would have been that he was in the store.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anybody else in the store besides you and Mrs.
Hunter and this man Oswald and the wife and the two little children
during this time?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; I don't believe there was. There was someone out in
front of the store, you know, there always was. I remember something
about that, but I wouldn't swear that there was anyone out there in
front, any particular person out in front, but there usually was two
or three men that kind of hung around there because that was on the
corner and had been the bus station and, you know, people just walk in
and walk out there, you know, and they ask for information for first
one thing and another, you know, in my store and I was always real good
about giving them information and like I probably told him where he
could go get the gun part he was looking for.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember whether you directed him to another
gunshop or not?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Just to be sure about it, I don't know now, but I'm
just almost sure that I did if he asked me.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember where you told him to go?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. If I directed him, it would have been east of me,
probably at the Irving Sports Shop or even down on the highway at some
pawnshop or something like that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know the man who owns the Irving Sports Shop?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; Woodrow Greener.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long have you known him?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Oh, I have known Woodrow for about 20 years, I guess.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you a good friend of his or close to him at all?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; I wouldn't say real close--I just knew him. He had
been in and out of business there for a number of years and I have
lived in Irving all of my life, so I wouldn't say I was a real close
friend to him--I just know him.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know a young man by the name of Dial Ryder?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I didn't know Dial Ryder.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Ryder now; have you met him since that time?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; I haven't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever discussed this series of events with Mr.
Greener?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; I did discuss it with Mr. Greener over the
telephone and Woodrow Greener was out of town. He said at that time he
probably was, but he was gone deer hunting, you know, he hunts, and he
and his wife were out of town at that time because we talked about it.

Mr. LIEBELER. When did you talk to Mr. Greener about this; do you
remember?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. When the FBI men came out there and talked to me on the
Saturday.

Mr. LIEBELER. On that same Saturday?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you never had any discussion with Mr. Greener at
any time about this at all prior to the time in November when the FBI
talked to you; is that right?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Not until the FBI talked to me, you know, I didn't talk
to him or anything, but I called Woodrow on the telephone and told him
and the FBI men were in his store at that time when I called him and
that was the only time he told me, but I don't think I was even in town
at that time.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you read the newspaper, generally speaking?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Which newspapers do you read?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, I take them all--I read them all. I take the
Dallas Morning News and I take the Times Herald out of Dallas and then
I have the Irving papers too and I read them all.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that shortly after the assassination,
around Thanksgiving time, as a matter of fact, there was a story in the
Dallas Times Herald to the effect that Oswald had had some work done on
his rifle in the Irving Sports Shop?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; I read that and I also saw it on television.

Mr. LIEBELER. When you saw that, it was also reported on television; is
that right?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; it sure did. As well as I can remember it, it
showed this Ryder, or whatever his name was, working around there and
talking to the men.

Mr. LIEBELER. Who was the first person you ever discussed Oswald's
presence in your store with?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I never discussed it until I saw him on television and
also his wife. First, when I saw him on television I told my husband,
but my husband didn't work in the store, then, he worked at another
furniture store on down on the east end of the road, you know, and I
told him, I said, "Why, I have seen the fellow somewhere before," and
it didn't dawn on me at that minute where. He says, "Well, you have
probably seen him in the store." Just like that. I mean, anybody would
come through Irving and be looking for anything like that would more
than likely stop in my store quicker than they would any other place.

Mr. LIEBELER. Looking for furniture, you mean?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, if he was looking for a gun or anything like that
he would stop in there because this sign was a real good sign, you
know, it was and out there, and also it was a good furniture location.
So he said "You probably have," and we didn't discuss it any more until
we saw her on television, Mrs. Oswald, and she was leaving the jail or
something, with her mother-in-law and had these two babies. I said,
"Oh, yes, I remember them real well," and I discussed it again with him
and I told him about this and I said that those kids are about the age
of Bryan and Jeff and we discussed it again and then I knew definitely
he had been in there and I knew that he was the fellow that I talked
to, and I said, "Well, he seemed to be such a nice man." He even
thanked me for my time when he walked out--you know, he thanked me for
the time I had spent with him, more so than anyone else. I mean, very
few people will thank anyone for their time in a store like that, you
know, but he did. He thanked me for his time.

Mr. LIEBELER. Isn't it a fact that a newspaper reporter came into your
store one day and talked to you about this?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. A lady.

Mr. LIEBELER. When was that?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. She was before the FBI men came and talked to me and I
don't have her name, but one of the FBI men called me and asked me if I
remembered her name and I don't. The only thing, she came in a little
foreign car and another gentleman was driving the car for her and she
showed me her credentials, just who she was, and she told me she was a
White House correspondent.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you remember her name if I suggested it to you?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I don't know whether I would or not.

Mr. LIEBELER. How about Coleman, does that seem familiar to you?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Might have been.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember when she came by, was that after you had
seen Ryder on television telling about Oswald?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; that was before.

Mr. LIEBELER. It was before?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; it was before.

Mr. LIEBELER. And did you tell this lady reporter the same story you
told us--exactly?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; and she took it down at that time and this
gentleman that was with her, he had a tape recorder and he took down
everything that I said.

Mr. LIEBELER. They took it down on a tape recorder?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; he sure did, and she wrote it down in a little
notebook, you know, but she accidentally stopped in the store. I had
never told anyone, you know, had ever made the statement to anybody
that he was in there. Of course, it was discussed, I'm sure, to people
that I knew, you know, I said, "Well, I had seen him," but there are a
lot of people in Irving I'm sure that had seen him and his wife both.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did it occur to you after you became aware of the fact
that Oswald had been in your store asking for some repairs about a gun
that you should call the FBI or the Dallas Police Department and tell
them about this?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; it really didn't. I just figured I would wait and
see if anybody got to looking for him. I didn't contact anyone. I
waited until they contacted me. I didn't know where I could be any help
to them at all.

Mr. LIEBELER. So, the Oswalds walked out of the store?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And then you said Mrs. Oswald, I believe, and the
children went out first; is that right?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. They were ahead of him.

Mr. LIEBELER. How long was Oswald in the store--how long did he stay in
the store after they left?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, he followed them right on out, but they were in
line. She started out before he did, with the children, and the little
girl--the little 2-year-old, you know, was ahead of all of them and
I had a little stepoff there and the mother kind of waited until she
stepped off of that, but Oswald himself never did help her with the
children or anything like that while she was in the store, you know.

Mr. LIEBELER. And during the time they were in the store she didn't say
one word?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. She never uttered one word that I knew about. I
caught him at one time looking at her and I kind of felt like they
were exchanging glances or something like that, you know, but she
never uttered one word, either whether she liked it or whether she
didn't like it, and I made the remark after they left, after we talked
about trading the children, you know, jokingly, and I said to Mrs.
Hunter, "Well, I don't think she liked what I said about trading those
children," and she didn't offer to show us the baby.

Mr. LIEBELER. You made quite a fuss over the children, I presume?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; I am a great hand to notice children. I just
really am, you know, and I always felt like it was one way to get in
touch with the customer--is to brag on the children, you know. The
closer you get to them the better off you are when you are trying to
sell them something, and really, I was, you know, interested in selling
him furniture when he told me he needed it.

Mr. LIEBELER. How about this little 3-year-old girl, did she seem to be
an ordinarily developed girl---she could walk around and everything?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; she was pretty.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did she say anything at all?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. She mumbled--as she went out of the store she was about
halfway crying, not really crying, but mumbling something. I couldn't
understand her or anything, and that's the reason that at one time
I thought--well, I'll hand her a piece of candy, but then I didn't
because a lot of people don't like you to give their children candy and
the woman hadn't been friendly enough with me to make me really want
to, but I really would have liked to have given the little girl some
candy. She was a beautiful little child.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did the little girl say anything you could understand at
all?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; she just kind of whined like, you know, it might
have been that she was a little cowed or something--I don't know.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, as they walked out of the store, did you see them
get in the car?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I probably did, but I didn't pay much attention to
them--to remember how they did--I didn't--it was just like anybody
else walking out of the store, you know, I didn't see them get in the
car. I'm sure they got in a car and I just faintly remember that maybe
that that car was a two-tone car and that they got in there and drove
off and like I say, I don't know how they got into the car, because I
didn't pay too much attention to them.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see where they went when they got in the car?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I didn't pay too much attention. Mrs. Hunter said they
went back the wrong way down the street.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you didn't see that?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I probably saw it but I didn't--I wouldn't say that
they did because I don't know. So many people pull that stunt anyway
and it was just everyday, you know, people make mistakes on that street
all the time about going the wrong way and I had seen numbers of them
going the wrong way and if they did go, the wrong way, you know, I
don't remember it.

Mr. LIEBELER. It wasn't such an extraordinary thing to have that happen?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; but what was, you know, out of the ordinary
person--not talking. I'm friendly--I'm just a real friendly person and
going on over the babies--I would have liked to have looked at the
baby and all. That was what stuck with me more than anything else, you
know, the way she acted and him too. He was nothing out of the ordinary
except that he thanked me for his time, you know, that he had taken,
and I suggested furniture to him and tried to find out what kind they
were looking for and they weren't quite ready for it and it was going
to be a couple of weeks before they moved out and he told me that they
were living in an apartment.

Mr. LIEBELER. What did he tell you about that?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I asked him. So many people would come in the store,
you know, to buy furniture you know, and try to get it as cheap as they
could because they were living in a furnished apartment, so I usually
asked them if they were in apartments or something, and he told me they
were and I know they wanted bedroom furniture, because I took them back
there and showed them bedroom furniture. They also had to have living
room furniture and I asked him what type of furniture and I said,
"So many people are using Early American or Danish Modern." I mean,
young people were using a lot of that Danish Modern and I couldn't
get anything out of her even after suggesting that and I thought if I
suggested that that they would tell me what they were looking for, but
I never did find out.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did he say where they lived?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. But he said they were living in an apartment?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. They were living in an apartment--yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, did you hear subsequent to that time on television
that Oswald and his wife weren't living together?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I heard, yes; you know--after the assassination, I
mean, but even at that time I never asked him his name or anything
like that. If I had carried out what I usually do, I would have gotten
his name, because if they are looking for anything that I don't
have--didn't have in the store, I would suggest that they let me give
them a card, you know, to go to the wholesale house. Had I given them
a card to the wholesale house, he would have had to give me his name.
You see, I didn't get that far along on it. I mean, you know, and I
just didn't--I wished I had now, but she sure was with him, whether she
knew where she was going or what she was doing or anything, but she
certainly was with him. Even, you know, her dress and all--as far as
telling you what color she had on--I could tell you just about how she
was dressed. She looked clean but she looked like she was a person that
had gotten in the car to come up to town for something and she probably
come out of the house with just the dress she had on and a short coat,
and the little girl had on some kind of a short coat. It wasn't really
cold--it wasn't real cold then and he had on slacks. He didn't have on
what I call really work clothes--he wasn't dressed--but he had on a
pair of slacks.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of shirt did he have on?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. It was a sport coat, I think, with the collar turned
back and he had on a sweater, you know, deal. They weren't dressed,
you know, really dressed, but they were dressed good enough to go out,
you know, to kind of casual shop or something like that--that kind of
shopping.

Mr. LIEBELER. Are you absolutely sure that they drove up at first in an
automobile and that they went back out and got into an automobile and
drove away?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; they did.

Mr. LIEBELER. The report that I have of the interview you had with the
FBI agents in December indicates that you told them that they went out
of the store and got into the car and made a =U=-turn and drove off
east down Irving Boulevard.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember telling them that?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, where I got that--I wouldn't swear that they
really went down, you know, turned their car there--Mrs. Hunter told me
that they did, you know, and kind of reviewed me at that time, but so
many people did that anyway that they went back down the wrong way.

It has been so long now I have, you know, really forgotten whether they
did or not, but you know, the color of the car and the make of the car
stands out more to me than anything. There was only one correct way for
them to go and that was west.

Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't at any time see anybody else with them?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I wouldn't swear to it.

Mr. LIEBELER. You didn't see anybody?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I didn't see anyone--no. They didn't get out of the
car, let me put it that way.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see the car close enough at any time to see
whether there was anybody else sitting in the car?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I could have seen it, but I didn't pay any attention to
it. They could have had a driver--I don't know.

Mr. LIEBELER. You are sure it wasn't a station wagon that was sitting
out there?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I'm not sure--I'm really not, but it does not seem like
it was. Had I known all this was coming up I would have took it all
down, but you know, people--when you are in business, you don't pay
a lot of attention to that, but there are incidents that happen that
will, you know, be clear in your mind.

Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a picture that has been marked Pizzo Exhibit
No. 453-A, and I ask you if you recognize anybody in that picture?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I don't--no; I don't.

Mr. LIEBELER. I show you another photograph that has been marked Pizzo
Exhibit No. 453-B, and ask you if you recognize anybody in that picture?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I don't know this one either.

Mr. LIEBELER. You don't recognize anybody in there either?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; not as far as I see it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, what about Bringuier Exhibit No. 1, do you see
anybody in there that looks familiar?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I couldn't identify anyone in there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, what about Garner Exhibit No. 1, does that person
look familiar to you?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; he does.

Mr. LIEBELER. That one does?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And is that the same man that came in the store that day?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; he looked younger in the store than he does there.
Of course, there's the shadow that's on him there that causes him to
look that way, but he does.

Mr. LIEBELER. Does that look like the man that came in the store--do
you have any doubt about it?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I don't have a doubt in the world but what it wasn't
him.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, I will show you this one--Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-C.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Now, that looks more like him--he was more pleasant
looking in the store than he is in these pictures here.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, I show you a picture that has been marked Commission
Exhibit No. 171, and ask you if you recognize anybody in that picture?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Huh.

Mr. LIEBELER. Who do you recognize there?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Mrs. Oswald is there, I mean, his wife.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you think that's the woman that was in the store that
day?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; but of course she's not dressed there like she
was, but that's her and that's the little girl and the little girl
wasn't dressed like that either.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, I will show you a photograph marked Commission
Exhibit No. 177 and I ask you if you recognize anybody in there?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, that's his wife there, isn't it?

Mr. LIEBELER. Does that look like the woman that was in the store?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; she was attractive even then, I mean, she was a
pretty girl then, of course, when she came in the store she wore her
hair just right back and had it in a pony tail back that way.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did she have short hair or long hair?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. She had long hair and had enough that she could tie it
back here.

Mr. LIEBELER. What about that man sitting in the middle there of
Commission Exhibit No. 177, does he look familiar to you?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, yes; he kind of resembles him--yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Does that look something like the man that was in the
store?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; the one sitting there with her?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; here is another picture that has been marked as
Commission Exhibit No. 172, and I ask you if you recognize any of the
people in that picture?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. That's Mrs. Oswald there.

Mr. LIEBELER. What about the man? Does that man look like the man that
was there in the store?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, it resembles him. Of course, if I could see
him right in the face, you know, like I looked at him--the features
are---like him.

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; and in Exhibit No. 177, of course, he does present a
full face.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. That looks more like him there, you know, it really
does.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Mrs. Whitworth, the testimony that you have given to
us about this event is of considerable importance to the Commission for
many reasons that are not, I'm sure, even clear to you at the moment.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you be willing to come back again on Friday morning
and meet with Marina Oswald and the children to see if those really
were the people that were in your store?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. This Friday morning?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I like you to put it up early enough--I go to work at
12 on Friday and if you would make it real early, and I have another
appointment real early Friday morning that I could put off, I guess, or
maybe do it in the morning. I have an appointment to get my hair fixed
on Friday and I have that every Friday morning and I go to work at 12
and I would like for this not to interfere any more than is possible,
you know, with my job. I work for J. C. Penney's there in Plymouth Park
and they are real nice. They have given me time off because they had
to, you know, but I would rather it not interfere with that.

Mr. LIEBELER. What time would be convenient for you on Friday
morning--about 9 o'clock?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I would like to meet with her--that would be all right.
Really, I would like to meet with her one time, you know, to--of
course, I have only seen her on television and I saw her there at the
store and I would like for her to tell me that she went into that
store. I believe she would if she's telling what she did--she might not
recognize me now, you know, out of the store, but I believe that woman
would tell you that she went in that store if she saw that store. I
believe she would--that little girl, the oldest one, isn't she a dark
headed girl, and at that time she wore--she had her bangs cut.

Mr. LIEBELER. I don't know; I have never seen the little girl.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, she was real attractive and I am attracted to
little girls, you know, I just love them. Of course, I love little
boys, too, you understand, because I've got one of them, but little
girls--mine--I used to sew for them and I have always wanted another
little girl and I always made over little girls more so than I did
little boys, that that little girl, as well as I remember, she had
straight hair and she had little bangs in the front and she was just a
real cute child, but I would really like to meet with them again and I
would like for her to tell me that she went in that store. She would
remember it; I'm sure that she would remember it. There isn't any doubt
in my mind but that she wasn't in there and him too.

Mr. LIEBELER. Then, we will meet with you again at 9 o'clock on Friday
morning.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. All right.

Mr. LIEBELER. By the way, how long would you say that the husband and
wife were in the store from the time that they came back in the second
time?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, 30 or 40 minutes--maybe.

Mr. LIEBELER. That was during the time that they were looking at
furniture?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes; she didn't come in, now, until he went back to the
car.

Mr. LIEBELER. My question is: From the time that he went back out and
she came in, how long were the two of them in the store together?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I'd say 30 or 40 minutes, which is a long time.

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; and did she seem interested in any of the
furniture--what did she do during this 30 or 40 minute period?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, she walked back where we were and I had moved
some beds to show her, pulling them around and showing them to her, and
as well as I remember, I had a little red maple suite back there and
I had some dark walnut suites and I was showing them used furniture
because they looked like people that would buy used furniture and she
stood there and looked and, like I say, the little girl was whining
around and I would see him exchange glances at her, you know, kind of
look up and down but I never did see her--I never did catch her but I
thought they were exchanging glances at one another and she was not
interested and she walked back up and around in the other part of the
store and I stayed back there and I talked to him.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have the feeling that there was any hostility
between these two people that they weren't getting along too well?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, she just didn't say anything. She wasn't
interested in what he was looking at, didn't look to be, you know,
and if they were--well--I just don't know, or I would say that there
was any misunderstanding--there wasn't any smiles and there wasn't any
jokes and neither one of them exchanged smiles. It wouldn't be like if
I was going out shopping and my husband was going to buy something for
me. I believe I would be more pleasant, but you know, I guess she just
didn't know what he was talking about, but we were looking at furniture
and I believe he went back to the car and told her to get out.

Mr. LIEBELER. She just didn't seem to be very interested in that
furniture?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; she didn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever had any other occasion in the entire time
you have been running a furniture store, when a man and a wife came in
and spent 30 or 40 minutes looking at furniture in a store and they
never exchanged one single word between each other?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; not one single word.

Mr. LIEBELER. That just almost defies ordinary human experience;
doesn't it?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Wouldn't you say that--usually?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; I never had anything like that. They usually agree
or disagree and they usually exchange a few words.

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; they usually exchange a few words.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; I never had an occasion like that--that's the
reason it stood out to me like that more than anything else. I have
waited on a lot of people in 10 years and I have had an awful lot of
people come in my store. Some of them I would recognize and some of
them I wouldn't, but that incident just stood out and after all of
this--you just knew it was them.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would it refresh your recollection if I suggested that
Oswald, or this man that came into the store, was looking for a
plunger--did he tell you what he was looking for, that he was looking
for a plunger?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. It might have been a plunger. Like I say, I don't know
a thing in the world about guns. It could have been a plunger. We have
discussed that since then and I have never said what it was that he
was looking for--whatever he had--he had in his hands. I mean, he had
something in his hand.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where were you standing in the store when he walked out
and they got in the car?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I believe I walked back up to where my cash--in my
cash stand and it hit me about right here and I could lean on it and
my candy stand--I would have had to walk around another bar to have
gotten to the candy because I couldn't reach over and get it and I was
standing right like this and I was looking down on them and this bar
hit me about right here [indicating].

Mr. LIEBELER. About waist high?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. And I couldn't have went inside unless I had turned and
walked back around and that's as far as I got--was the cash register.

Mr. LIEBELER. Could you see the car from where you were standing?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I could have.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you actually see it drive east down Irving Boulevard
against the traffic?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I wouldn't say that I did see it drive east--I don't
believe--we talked about it.

Mr. LIEBELER. Who did?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, I might have made a statement one time about
that, but right now, I wouldn't say he did. There's too many cars that
drove up there that did go the wrong way, but I would say it was a blue
and white car and I have always said that it was a Ford or Plymouth--it
was something with fins on it.

Mr. LIEBELER. You say we discussed it--what do you mean by that--who is
"we"?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Mrs. Hunter and I, you know, now as far as going back
down the wrong way on that street--I wouldn't swear that the man did
and I don't think that I ever made the statement that he drove off,
because I don't know that he did.

Mr. LIEBELER. I quote the FBI report of your interview on December 14,
1963: "On leaving the Furniture Mart (second hand furniture store) the
Oswalds made a =U=-turn and left driving against traffic on East Irving
Boulevard in the direction of a gun repair shop in either a 1956 or
1957 two-tone blue and white Ford or Plymouth." Do you remember telling
the agents that?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I probably did and it might be fresher in my mind at
that time that they did go, but right now--I have talked with Mrs.
Hunter so much, that she was the one actually that said that they went
on the one way street the wrong way. Now, I might have said it at that
time, but right now, you know, it has been a good while since that
happened and not ever thinking anything would come of it--that I could
be more specific on what happened on the inside of the store than what
happened on the outside, because things like that happen every day, you
know, I mean on the outside, but no two people ever come in there and
acted like that for that length of time, you know, that I'm not going
to swear that he went the wrong way and I'm not going to say that he
drove that car off from there. Like I say, it wasn't that important to
me to know that at that time because I didn't know I was going to have
to--if I had--I would have been more specific about it, but I was in
a position where I could have seen it, but we remarked after he left
about what I had said and I got no comment about it from her, you know.

Mr. LIEBELER. All right, thank you very much and we will see you Friday
morning.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. All right.



TESTIMONY OF MRS. LEE HARVEY OSWALD, EDITH WHITWORTH, AND GERTRUDE
HUNTER

The testimony of Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald, Edith Whitworth, and Gertrude
Hunter was taken at 11 a.m., on July 24, 1964, in the office of the
U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets,
Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the
President's Commission. Present were June Oswald and Rachel Oswald,
children of Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald; William A. McKenzie and Henry Baer,
counsel for Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald; Peter Paul Gregory, interpreter;
and Forrest Sorrels and John Joe Howlett, special agents of the U.S.
Secret Service.

[Note.--The asterisk represents a response by Marina Oswald without
assistance of the interpreter. All other responses shown for Marina
Oswald were through the interpreter.]


Mr. LIEBELER. May the record show, Marina, that you have previously
been sworn as a witness when you appeared before the Commission in
Washington?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And you will regard the testimony that you are going to
give here this morning as a continuation of the testimony you gave to
the Commission, and I assume you will regard yourself as being under
oath as you did before the Commission?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Am I correct in understanding that Marina has indicated
she will regard herself as being under a continuing oath?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. The basic purpose for your presence here this morning
relates to testimony that has been given by two ladies, Mrs. Whitworth
and Mrs. Hunter, who are outside, that you were in a furniture store
in Irving, Tex., in early November with your two children and with Lee
Harvey Oswald.

Mrs. OSWALD. [No response.]

Mr. LIEBELER. I understand that you had previously testified about this
and have told the Commission that you were not in the store at that
time. We want these two ladies to have an opportunity to see you and
have you see them, to see if your recollection can be refreshed or if
they were mistaken. Is that agreeable with you, Marina?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I can remember--I'm sure, I never forget and the baby
is just 2 weeks. I would like to know under what circumstances these
two ladies saw me at that particular time?

Mr. McKENZIE. And furthermore, where the store is located?

Mr. LIEBELER. Let the record show that Mrs. Whitworth and Mrs. Hunter
have come into the room [reporter's note: 11:10 a.m.], and let the
record further show that they have both previously testified that
sometime in early November 1963, they saw Marina and the two children
and Lee Oswald in a furniture store located on East Irving Boulevard in
Irving, Tex.

Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember the name of the street.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, I will ask Mrs. Whitworth, who was the operator
of that store, the address of the store and to describe the store
generally for Marina and its name.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. The store was known as the Furniture Mart. The name
was clearly on it, and it was located at 149 East Irving Boulevard.
That's at the corner of Jefferson and Irving Boulevard on the north
side of the street and in the same block with the bank. In fact, the
back of it was up to the Bank & Trust there and it looked like at one
time it might have been a service station and we had changed it into a
furniture store, and they would have seen more used furniture in it,
because we had new and used furniture. This clear enough?

Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember the names of the streets--that wouldn't
be material to me. I wouldn't remember it.

Mr. LIEBELER. All right.

Mr. GREGORY. Would you like for me to give the complete answer of this
lady to her?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. That would be the main thoroughfare in Irving.

Mr. GREGORY. That's the street across from the bank?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; it would be in the same block with the Irving Bank
& Trust.

Mrs. OSWALD. The only thing I am interested in is whether Mrs.
Whitworth actually knows me or not, whether this lady actually saw me
or knows me or not. That's what I am interested in.

Mr. LIEBELER. Let us ask Mrs. Whitworth to describe briefly the
circumstances under which you say these people came in the store.

Mr. McKENZIE. And the time of the day, establish the time of the day
and the complete circumstances.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, it would be more from the middle of the day
until, you see, say 3 o'clock in the afternoon or maybe 4 o'clock in
the afternoon. When they came in, and drove up to the front, and Mr.
Oswald came in the store first.

He came in and asked, you know, about this part of the gun and then
he went back to the car, and after asking me about, you know, it--I
said I didn't have the part--I didn't have the gun part that he
wanted, he said, "You have furniture in here?" And I said, "Yes." He
said, "I am going to be needing some," and he went back to the car
and took whatever he had back to the car, and then he came back in
and she followed him and she had the baby in her arms. It was a tiny
baby--he told me it was 2 weeks old, and this little girl [indicating
June Oswald] was walking in front of Mrs. Oswald and she was whining
a little bit and Mrs. Oswald was, you know, carrying the baby and we
come back in and went to the extreme back of the store, and I showed
them some bedroom suites and had to pull these beds out and Mrs. Oswald
stood there and she never said anything, but Mr. Oswald and I talked,
you know, about the furniture, and then we talked about the babies,
but she turned and left before he did, you know, because I walked back
up to the front of the store with him, because she was already at the
front of the store by the time we turned and went up there, and it was
a cool day and it was cool enough that you would have on a little wrap
and this little girl, as well as I remember, had on some kind of a
short sweater or coat, and Mrs. Oswald had on a short coat too, and she
had her hair tied back.

She doesn't look like she does today, because her face was fuller then
and it might have been because she just had this baby then and still
hadn't gone back like she was. This baby was just a tiny thing. I
didn't see it, it was wrapped up in some kind of a blanket, but this
little girl--it definitely was her. It seemed like her hair was a
little darker but she did have on some kind of a cap.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you understand this?

*Mrs. OSWALD. I wonder if somebody was in car or not?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. That, I wouldn't testify that there was anybody in
the car with you, because I observed what happened in the store, you
know. I mean, you impressed me in the store and not out of the store.
I didn't notice, because too many people drove up. I thought your car
was a two-tone car, either a Ford or a Plymouth--now--I don't know. I
thought it was blue and white--I wouldn't, you know, swear to that. I
mean, too many cars drove up out in front like that, but it was what
happened on the inside of the store that I was more impressed with
and remembered, and your actions and his, because she acted like she
wasn't interested in what he said because she didn't exchange words or
anything, but I did talk to him, and I know it was him and I know she
was in there.

She may not remember it, but if I was to see her today and seeing her
that day and I was to meet her on the street, it would be hard for me
to identify her. You know, she still has the features, but her face was
round and she had her hair pulled back [indicating].

Mr. GREGORY. You mean in a pony tail?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. In a pony tail.

*Mrs. OSWALD. No; it wasn't that.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, there was something tied around it--you had
something tied around it, I mean, slicked back from her face.

*Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't wear this.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I called it a pony tail, but it was kind of pulled back
to the back.

*Mrs. OSWALD. I had two pigtails.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, she might have--it was tied back and whipped back
from her face. Her face was round then and she was pretty then--I'd say
she was pretty.

*Mrs. OSWALD. Thank you.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. The little girl--I tried to talk to her and attract her
attention, but she was whining all the time she was in there and she
was trying to attend to this little girl and had this baby in her arms
and the little girl walked out in front of her, you know, when they
left the store.

*Mrs. OSWALD. Just one time I was in the store? I do not remember that
I was ever in a furniture store. That does not make a difference for
me. I recall the time when I was in a store with Mrs. Ruth Paine.

Mr. GREGORY. Which store was it?

Mrs. OSWALD. In that store they were selling baby things and towels and
I was looking for something for a child.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. No; I didn't sell anything like that--mine was all
furniture.

*Mrs. OSWALD. There was just one store like that.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. But we went to the extreme back of the store and, as
well as I remember, I had a used reddish maple bookcase headboard bed,
you know, I was showing you.

Mrs. OSWALD. I was never in any furniture store.

Mrs. WHITWORTH. Well, she didn't act like she was, even that day, you
know, she walked off.

*Mrs. OSWALD. You know, not because I want to say you are wrong, but
I can't remember I was in a furniture store, especially when I talked
with somebody.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Marina, you said you do remember one time that you
were in a store with Mrs. Paine and with Lee and with the children. Do
you remember how long you were in the store that time?

*Mrs. OSWALD. About 30 minutes.

Mr. LIEBELER. And how long, Mrs. Whitworth, was she in the store this
time that you are talking about?

Mrs. WHITWORTH. I would say from 30 to 40 minutes.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you don't remember Marina seeing any furniture in the
store at that time?

*Mrs. OSWALD. No; this was a cafe on that side--on the left side and
baby clothes on the right side, and a radio and that's all.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember what you went to that store for?

*Mrs. OSWALD. To buy Junie pants--rubber pants.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you buy some clothes for June; do you remember ever
seeing these ladies before, Marina?

*Mrs. OSWALD. Just this one [indicating Mrs. Hunter]. Perhaps, now, I
saw her, because there is a woman of that particular type, a lady like
this out in Richardson--I may have seen a lady like this in Richardson.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you do remember seeing a woman that looked something
like Mrs. Hunter, here, Mrs. Hunter being the woman in the blue dress?

*Mrs. OSWALD. I don't think that I saw her, but I saw a woman or women
like her--not one, but many of that type.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Mrs. Hunter, as you sit here and you look at these
children and you look at Marina, are you sure in your own mind that
these were the people who were in the store that day?

Mrs. HUNTER. I have seen Marina several times before the baby
came--several times. She said she saw me--do you remember talking to a
lady about getting help for you before your baby came?

Mrs. OSWALD. For housework?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; she was talking about the welfare of clothes for the
baby before the baby came, but I don't know who she was.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, wait just a minute, Mrs. Hunter, you say you talked
to Marina about this?

Mrs. HUNTER. She was with another woman and this other woman didn't
come around, and I couldn't understand too much of what she said, and
she couldn't understand too much of what I said, and I says, "If you
need help with this baby, we can get you help at Parkland Hospital." Do
you remember that?

Mr. LIEBELER. Just a minute, would you describe the other woman?

Mrs. HUNTER. Now, the other woman don't mean a thing to me. All I
know, she was with this other woman, but I live on Second Street and
it was down below me, four or five different streets and this woman,
I believe, was going to see someone about fixing a tire or changing a
tire. Now, I couldn't tell you what the other woman had on because it
was just curiosity to me why--that her couldn't speak like we could and
was in this condition and I kept asking her where her husband was and
I never did make her understand me and I finally asked her if they had
separated [indicating hand signals]--and I did that way--with her, and
she made me understand he was staying over in town, but then, I didn't
know who she was or nothing about her.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where did all this happen?

Mrs. HUNTER. Let me see, it was in a filling station--how come me at
the station--I don't know whether that's the day that we looked at a
car that this man had for sale at the station or not.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where do you think this happened, Mrs. Hunter?

Mrs. HUNTER. It was on the corner of Sixth and Hastings Street--I
know where the station was--I couldn't even tell you the name of the
station, because we were looking at a car there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, what were the circumstances under which you were in
this station, Mrs. Hunter?

Mrs. HUNTER. Now, I have never been there but about twice, but at this
particular time, last July until right after Christmas, we were looking
just for a used pickup or a used car for my husband to haul his tools
in. We have a used car at this time there was a car for sale there.

*Mrs. OSWALD. After Christmas?

Mrs. HUNTER. What?

*Mrs. OSWALD. After Christmas?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I said we were looking for used cars, so that's bound
to have been my purpose there because we do not trade with that man.
Do you know a driveway and a filling station and a washateria on Sixth
Street?

Mrs. OSWALD. No; I don't remember Irving.

Mrs. HUNTER. This was before--I would say it was in September or
October. It was before--just a little while, I know, before your baby
came, because I won't tell you the remark I made, but anyhow, I know it
was pretty close--almost due time--you could tell from the way you were
carrying the baby, it was almost time for the baby.

*Mrs. OSWALD. I can't remember her [indicating Mrs. Whitworth].

Mr. LIEBELER. Didn't you see this other woman at all, Mrs. Hunter?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; she got out and had her back to me and if I'm not
badly mistaken the woman had on a dark dress, but what the woman looked
like, it wasn't even dawning on me, because I wasn't even interested.
The only thing I seen that she was very uncomfortable and what I
thought she was saying was that she was going to have to have help when
the baby comes.

Mr. McKENZIE. Excuse me, but I would like to ask her a question; may I?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes.

Mr. McKENZIE. Mrs. Hunter, what is your full name, please?

Mrs. HUNTER. Gertrude Hunter.

Mr. McKENZIE. What is your husband's name?

Mrs. HUNTER. John T. Hunter.

Mr. McKENZIE. Do you work with Mrs. Whitworth there in the store?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; just visiting her.

Mr. McKENZIE. You were not in the store on this particular occasion
that Mrs. Whitworth has described; is that correct?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; I was there.

Mr. McKENZIE. You were there?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. McKENZIE. And what were you doing in the store that morning or that
day?

Mrs. HUNTER. We go to football games together and we were down
discussing whether we was going to have, what do you call it, caravan
cars or charter a bus, and it was after 2 o'clock in the afternoon,
because I never did leave the house only after 2. My daughter works at
Commercial Title and she calls me before she goes back off of her lunch
hour at 2 o'clock.

Mr. LIEBELER. So, this was after 2 o'clock and prior to the football
weekend; is that correct?

Mrs. HUNTER. On Wednesday or Thursday--I won't say just which day.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, on that occasion when you were in the store with
Mrs. Whitworth at the Furniture Mart, did Mrs. Oswald or her husband
buy any clothes or anything of the sort?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, she went to talking about the cafe. It used to be
a bus station and it has the counter and the chairs for the cafe. The
only thing she had there was the candy, and there was some used clothes
and a church or welfare or something had had them there, they had their
used clothes there, and there were some shoes there. Now, she might
have thought she was in a cafe or a drygoods store.

*Mrs. OSWALD. No.

Mr. McKENZIE. At that time I'm asking you about, did either Mrs. Oswald
or her husband buy any clothes; do you recall?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; they didn't buy anything.

Mr. LIEBELER. You had seen Mrs. Oswald before; is that correct?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; but I didn't know who she was until now--I do now--I
would know her eyes.

Mr. McKENZIE. Of course, you have seen many pictures of her since then.

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I'll be honest with you, I have only seen her once
on television and that was in Washington, and day before yesterday I
wanted to be sure that this woman had the long hair, and the way it
looked there. Now, I'm honest with him about that. I didn't watch the
run of it on television.

Mr. McKENZIE. By "him" you are referring to Mr. Liebeler here?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, I don't know what his name is.

Mr. LIEBELER. That's right.

Mr. McKENZIE. Now, on this occasion when she was in the store with the
two children and her husband, that Mrs. Whitworth has described, did
you notice the automobile that they came in?

Mrs. HUNTER. I sure did.

Mr. McKENZIE. And was it in the same automobile you had seen her in
before at the filling station?

Mrs. HUNTER. No.

*Mrs. OSWALD. Not the same? Not the same?

Mr. McKENZIE. Did you go outside and see the automobile?

Mrs. HUNTER. I was standing in the side door looking up and down the
street while she had went with them to the back. Now, I didn't hear her
say nothing and I don't know whether she said something to the little
girl, or what she said, but she did go "shhh." She could have said
"shhh" or something, but I remember her making some kind of a remark to
the little girl.

Mr. McKENZIE. To quiet the little girl?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. McKENZIE. Now, at that time did you notice the automobile in front?

Mrs. HUNTER. Can I tell him what I told you?

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes.

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, what I meant--I didn't want to do something that I
shouldn't. I was looking for some friends of mine from Houston that
drove a two-tone blue and white Ford--a 1957--I think it was, and when
this car drove up, I left a note on my mailbox when I left the house
and I told them if they come while I was gone to come down to this
place, because I would be there, or left her telephone number on the
note too, and when they drove up----

Mr. LIEBELER. Who is "they" now?

Mrs. HUNTER. Mr. and Mrs. Dominik from Houston, and when this car drove
up, I thought it was them and I just said, "Well, my company has come,"
and that was it and when I seen he was getting out of the car I just
seen then that it wasn't, and I just sat back down in the platform
rocker there where I was sitting. It was a partition in the front part
of the store and I was sitting right here in platform rocker and there
was some tables and chairs over here and I had opened this side door.
She had it shut and I had opened it.

Mr. McKENZIE. Did your friends from Houston come while they were there?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; they never did come up until later on, and he come up
in a truck--several weeks later.

Mr. McKENZIE. Was there anybody else in the automobile that drove up
that they got out of?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; just her and him and the two children. Now, I wasn't
up close to the car. I was standing in the door and the car was parked
over here something like this, and somebody could have been down in the
floorboard of the car--I wouldn't say they wasn't.

Mr. McKENZIE. Did you see who was driving the automobile?

Mrs. HUNTER. He got under the steering wheel.

*Mrs. OSWALD. Lee?

Mr. LIEBELER. And you saw him drive the car?

Mrs. HUNTER. I seen him at the steering wheel, under the steering
wheel, and if there was someone else, now, in there, you couldn't see
them.

Mr. LIEBELER. Well, in any event, Mr. Oswald got behind the steering
wheel of the car and he drove the car out of the parking lot in front
of the building somewhere; isn't that right?

*Mrs. OSWALD. I have never seen Lee drive the car in my lifetime. Lee
never drove a car with me or the children in it. The only time I saw
him behind the wheel was when Ruth Paine taught him to drive the car,
he was practicing parking the car when Ruth Paine was teaching him to
drive.

Mr. LIEBELER. And that was all in front of Mr. Paine's house; wasn't it?

*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. I'm sure this lady is trying to tell the truth, but
the only possible person who could have driven the car when we were in
that store could have been Mrs. Ruth Paine. She knows all the stores
where we went because we never went there without her.

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, you've got your privileges--you've got your
privileges.

Mr. McKENZIE. Mrs. Hunter, back in September or October when you were
in the Shell filling station and Mrs. Oswald and the little girl here,
June, and another lady happened to be there--that was the occasion when
your husband was looking for the pickup truck--did either Mrs. Oswald
get out of the car or did the other lady get out of the automobile?

Mrs. HUNTER. She was standing beside the car, now, I don't even
remember the baby being there--being in the car.

Mr. LIEBELER. But Mrs. Oswald was standing beside the car?

Mrs. HUNTER. Standing beside the car.

Mr. McKENZIE. And where was the other lady standing?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, she went either to the restroom or into the filling
station. She wasn't out there--I never did say anything to this woman.

Mr. McKENZIE. The other woman----

Mrs. HUNTER. Do you remember anyone saying anything to you about a
Salvation Army woman?

*Mrs. OSWALD. Salvation Army woman? I don't know what the Salvation
Army is.

Mrs. HUNTER. This woman was dressed and I told her I would get her, I
would get her a contact. She dresses in these regular white uniforms
most of the time?

Mrs. OSWALD. At the time this lady claims that she saw me, I was not
interested in any help or I did not need any help for the baby from the
standpoint of social help, because we already made all the preparations
for the baby.

Mr. LIEBELER. Mrs. Hunter, when you say you saw these people at the
service station, you indicated that the other lady got out of the car,
and even though you didn't see her face, you did see her standing in
the area of the service station; is that right?

Mrs. HUNTER. You see, we had drove up where he had some used cars and
she was there by herself because----

Mr. LIEBELER. When you say "she" you have to say who.

Mrs. HUNTER. Mrs. Oswald.

Mr. LIEBELER. Mrs. Oswald?

Mrs. HUNTER. And I don't know whether she had got out to go into the
restroom or what, but that's where she seen me instead of in Richardson.

Mr. LIEBELER. My question is, did you see the other lady standing in
the area of the filling station?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; I didn't see the other woman--I really couldn't tell
you what she looked like. I just seen a woman go into the filling
station or into the restroom and I presumed it was who she was with,
because she said--she didn't ask for any help and I couldn't understand
her and she couldn't understand me, you see.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Mrs. Hunter, I want to try and find out--you said
you saw this other woman walk into the restroom?

Mrs. HUNTER. I seen a woman--I don't know whether it was the one that
was driving the car she was in or not, because she was standing beside
the car.

Mr. LIEBELER. That's what I'm trying to get to--was this a skinny
woman, a fat woman, a tall or short woman--what did she look like as
you saw her walk into the restroom?

Mrs. HUNTER. The woman, I don't believe she was quite as heavy as I am
and a little bit taller.

Mr. LIEBELER. How tall are you?

Mrs. HUNTER. Five feet two.

Mr. LIEBELER. And she's just a little bit taller than you?

Mrs. HUNTER. I would say this woman was taller than I am.

Mr. LIEBELER. How much?

Mrs. HUNTER. About 5 feet 4.

Mr. LIEBELER. About 5 feet 4 or 5 feet 5--how much do you think she
weighed?

Mrs. HUNTER. I would say about 135.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, did you see anybody else around the automobile?

Mrs. HUNTER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of car was it?

Mrs. HUNTER. When we got in our car and left she was still standing
beside the car.

Mr. LIEBELER. Mrs. Oswald was?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of car was it?

Mrs. HUNTER. Well, now, I wouldn't say as to that.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was it a convertible, was it a Volkswagen, was it a
station wagon, or was it an ordinary American-type car?

Mrs. HUNTER. It was just a car--but I wouldn't go back to it, because
it didn't dawn on me for sure.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was it a station wagon?

Mrs. HUNTER. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, you saw Mrs. Oswald, or who you think was Mrs.
Oswald, in the station there that day before you saw her in the
Furniture Mart; is that right?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, when you saw her in the Furniture Mart, did you
recognize her?

Mrs. HUNTER. No; it didn't dawn on me--I didn't think a thing in the
world about it.

*Mrs. OSWALD. Excuse me, do you remember how I was dressed and was I
pregnant at that time?

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes.

*Mrs. OSWALD. And what did I have on?

Mrs. HUNTER. All I know is you had on a jacket.

*Mrs. OSWALD. What color?

Mrs. HUNTER. It was pretty chilly--it was a rose or more of a--it
wasn't red.

*Mrs. OSWALD. Was it blue?

Mrs. HUNTER. It was more of a rose.

*Mrs. OSWALD. I had a rose short one.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, you testified before you had seen Mrs. Oswald
several times.

Mrs. HUNTER. Yes; but I didn't know who she was.

Mr. LIEBELER. Tell us about the other times you saw her.

Mrs. HUNTER. I have seen her in Minyards Grocery Store.

Mr. LIEBELER. What is that?

Mr. McKENZIE. [Spelling] M-i-n-y-a-r-d-s.

Mr. LIEBELER. Where is that?

Mrs. HUNTER. On Irving Boulevard.

*Mrs. OSWALD. Grocery store?

Mrs. HUNTER. And this drive-in grocery that I was talking about, if you
remember there--I think I had seen her there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now, aside fr